40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 323 of 346 Not logged in
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
387   Thu Mar 20 17:45:36 2008 ranaSummaryASSAdaptive Filtering in the ASS system
Over the past couple weeks we (Matt, Alex, Rob, me) have worked on getting an adaptive filter
system working. We wanted to load this system into c1ass to use this processor. The dither alignment
system hasn't been employed here for awhile and so we have just used this box.

The signals are acquired in the PEM ADCU. Alex modified the code there to send the signals over to
the new system. We also get the SUS-LSC_OUT signals from each of the suspensions so that we can
try to minimize them.

The outputs of the adaptive filter go into the unused SUS-MCL inputs of all the suspensions (except
for MC2). In the current setup, we have 6 accelerometers and 1 seismometer around the MC to be used
to demonstrate the principle of the whole thing.

Much more documentation and description of everything is necessary. We'll try to get Matt, Rob, and Alex
to use the elog.
384   Mon Mar 17 18:30:48 2008 mevansConfigurationPEMAdaptive Filtering
It seems that adaptive filtering can achieve results similar to those of the MISO FIR Wiener (entry 369). The adaptive code simulates real-time operation, but uses the same data used by Rana for the Wiener filter. I ran the adaptive filter over the data 100 times to ensure that it was well trained... maybe too well.
5811   Fri Nov 4 15:24:13 2011 MirkoUpdateAdaptive FilteringAdaptive FF on the MC doesn't make sense

[Den, Jenne, Mirko]

Here is the story:

1. High gain
The control loop has a high gain at the interesting frequencies. The error point (EP) before the servo is approx. zero and the information how much the mirror would move is in the feedback point (FB) behind the servo. The mirror doesn’t actually move because of the high gain. This is the case of the grav. wave detectors and medium frequencies (> approx. 50Hz, <<1kHz). Adding feed-forward (FF) to this doesn’t actually keep the mirror quieter. In fact if you look into the FB and subtract the seismic you make the mirror move more. Yes this is the case we have for the mode cleaner, doesn’t make sense.
In a real GW detector FF however isn’t totally useless. The FB tells you how much the mirror moves, due to GWs, seismic etc. When you record the FB and subtract (offline) the seismic you get closer to the real GW signal.

2. Low gain
When you, for technical reasons, can’t have a high gain in your control loop the EP contains information of how the mirror actually moves. You can then feed this into the adaptive filter and add its output to the FB. This will minimize the EP reducing the actual mirror motion. This is the case we will have for most or all other degrees of freedom in the 40m.

The reason we have so much gain in the mode cleaner length control is that we don’t actually move mirrors around. We change the frequency of the incoming laser light. You can do that crazy fast with a big amplitude. This gives us a high UGF and lots of gain in the 1Hz range we are interested in.

We now change the adaptive filter to look at the EP for all DOFs except for the MC. We calculate the effect of the FF on the MC length signal without ever applying the FF to the MC length control.

6163   Tue Jan 3 20:42:05 2012 Leo SingerUpdateGeneralActuators for Stewart platform

I checked on the two single-axis shakers that are present at the 40m that Steve pointed out:

• Brüel & Kjær type 4809, rated for 45 N peak, and
• Brüel & Kjær type 4810, rated for 10 N peak.

Neither of these meet the force requirement of 2.04 kN peak.

6165   Wed Jan 4 02:43:40 2012 ranaUpdateGeneralActuators for Stewart platform

 Quote: I checked on the two single-axis shakers that are present at the 40m that Steve pointed out: Brüel & Kjær type 4809, rated for 45 N peak, and Brüel & Kjær type 4810, rated for 10 N peak. Neither of these meet the force requirement of 2.04 kN peak.

Do we really need 40 microns at 500 Hz? Or perhaps should there be a frequency dependent displacement requirement?

17285   Fri Nov 18 16:58:39 2022 yutaSummaryBHDActuator calibrations for MICH BHD

As there is some confusion in actuator calibration, we have done the measurement again from scratch.
Results are the following.
New values for LO1, LO2, AS1, AS4 are obtained from free swinging ITMY-LO, so it should be more robust.

BS   : 26.54e-9 /f^2 m/counts ITMX :  4.93e-9 /f^2 m/counts ITMY :  4.90e-9 /f^2 m/counts LO1  : 26.34e-9 /f^2 m/counts LO2  :  9.81e-9 /f^2 m/counts AS1  : 23.35e-9 /f^2 m/counts AS4  : 24.07e-9 /f^2 m/counts

BS, ITMX, and ITMY actuator calibration:
Followed the procedure in 40m/16929.
Calibrated AS55_Q using X-Y plot to be 9.72e8 counts/m (Attachment #1), locked MICH with UGF of 10 Hz, and measured the transfer function from C1:LSC-BS,ITMX,ITMY_EXC to C1:LSC-AS55_Q_ERR.
The result is Attachment #2. They are consistent with 40m/16929.

LO1, LO2, AS1, and AS4 actuator calibration:
Followed similar steps with ITMY-LO fringe.
Calibrated BH55_Q using X-Y plot to be 7.40e9 counts/m (Attachment #3), locked ITMY-LO with UGF of ~15 Hz (Attachment #4), and measured the transfer function from C1:SUS-LO1,LO2,AS1,AS4_LSC_EXC to C1:LSC-BH55_Q_ERR.
The result is Attachment #5. They are inconsistent with 40m/17284, but this one should be more robust (see discussions below).

LO1, LO2, AS1, and AS4 actuator calibration by taking the ratio between ITMY:
We have also followed the steps in 40m/17206 to calibrate BHD actuators.
This method does not depend on BH55_Q optical gain calibration, but depends on ITMY calibration.
Measured OLTFs for ITMY-LO fringe locking is Attachment #6, and actuator ratio with respect to ITMY is Attachment #7. In this measurement, Bandstop filter at 96.7 Hz for AS4 was turned off, and gain was lowered by a factor of 2 to avoid AS4 oscillating.
This gives

LO1  : 116.81e-9 /f^2 m/counts LO2  :  51.69e-9 /f^2 m/counts AS1  : 101.48e-9 /f^2 m/counts AS4  : 117.84e-9 /f^2 m/counts

These are not consistent with 40m/17284, and larger by a factor of ~2-3.
These are also not consistent with the values from free swinging measurement, and are larger by a factor of ~4-5.
I guess there are some gains missing when comparing ITMY loop in c1lsc and other loops in c1hpc.

Attachment 1: AS55QMICH20221118.png
Attachment 2: ActBSITMXITMY20221118.png
Attachment 3: BH55QITMYLO20221118.png
Attachment 4: Screenshot_2022-11-18_14-41-57_LO-ITMY_LowUGF.png
Attachment 5: ActLOAS20221118.png
Attachment 6: ITMY-LO-OLTF20221118.png
Attachment 7: ITMY-LO-OLTFRatio20221118.png
16978   Thu Jul 7 18:22:12 2022 yutaUpdateLSCActuator calibration of MC2 using Yarm

(This is also a restore of elog 40m/16971 from Jul 5, 2022 at 17:36)

MC2 actuator calibration was also done using Yarm in the same way as we did in 40m/16970 (now 40m/16977).
The result is the following;
MC2 : -14.17e-9 /f^2 m/counts in arm length (-2.9905 times ITMY) MC2 :   5.06e-9 /f^2 m/counts in IMC length MC2 :  1.06e+05 /f^2 Hz/counts in IR laser frequency

What we did:
- Measured TF from C1:LSC-MC2_EXC to C1:LSC-YARM_IN1 during YARM lock using ETMY (see Attachment #1). Note that the sign of MC2 actuation and ITMY actuation is flipped.
- Took the ratio between ITM actuation and MC2 actuation to calculate MC2 actuation. For ITM actuation, we used the value measured using MICH (see 40m/16929). The average of the ratio in the frequency range 70-150 Hz was used (see Attachment #2).
- The actuation efficiency in meters in arm length was converted into meters in IMC length by multiplying it by IMCLength/ArmLength, where IMCLength=13.5 m is half of IMC round-trip length, ArmLength=37.79 m is the arm length.
- The actuation efficiency in meters in arm length was converted into Hz in IR laser frequency by multiplying it by LaserFreq/ArmLength, where LaserFreq=1064 nm / c is the laser frequency.

Files:
- Measurement files live in https://git.ligo.org/40m/measurements/-/tree/main/LSC/YARM
- Script for calculation lives at https://git.ligo.org/40m/scripts/-/blob/main/CAL/ARM/ETMActuatorCalibration.ipynb

Summary of actuation calibration so far:
BS   : 26.08e-9 /f^2 m/counts (see 40m/16929)
ITMX :  5.29e-9 /f^2 m/counts (see
40m/16929)
ITMY :  4.74e-9 /f^2 m/counts (see
40m/16929)
ETMX :  2.65e-9 /f^2 m/counts (0.5007 times ITMX) ETMY : 10.91e-9 /f^2 m/counts (2.3017 times ITMY)
MC2 : -14.17e-9 /f^2 m/counts in arm length (-2.9905 times ITMY) MC2 :   5.06e-9 /f^2 m/counts in IMC length

NOTE ADDED by YM on July 7, 2022

To account for the gain imbalance in ETMX, ETMY, MC2, LSC violin filter gains were set to: C1:LSC-ETMX_GAIN = 4.12 C1:LSC-MC2_GAIN = -0.77 This is a temporary solution to make ETMX and MC2 actuation efficiencies from LSC in terms of arm length to be the same as ETMY 10.91e-9 /f^2 m/counts.

I think it is better to make C1:LSC-ETMX_GAIN = 1, and put 4.12 in C1:SUS-ETMX_TO_COIL gains. We need to adjust local damping gains and XARM ASS afterwards. As for MC2, it is better to put -0.77 in LSC output matrix, since this balancing depends on LSC topology.

Attachment 1: TF.png
Attachment 2: MC2.png
16981   Fri Jul 8 16:18:35 2022 ranaUpdateLSCActuator calibration of MC2 using Yarm

although I know that Yuta knows this, I will just put this here to be clear: the NNN/f^2 calibration is only accurate abouve the pendulum POS eiegenfrequency, so when we estimate the DC part (in diaggui, for example), we have to assume that we have a pendulum with f = 1 Hz and Q ~5, to get the value of DC gain to put into the diaggui Gain field in the calibration tab.

16977   Thu Jul 7 18:18:19 2022 yutaUpdateLSCActuator calibration of ETMX and ETMX

(This is a complete restore of elog 40m/16970 from July 5, 2022 at 14:34)

ETMX and ETMY actuators were calibrated using single arm lock by taking the actuation efficiency ratio between ITMs. Below is the result.

ETMX :  2.65e-9 /f^2 m/counts (0.5007 times ITMX)
ETMY : 10.91e-9 /f^2 m/counts (2.3017 times ITMY)

Motivation:
- ETMX and ETMY actuators seemed to be unbalanced when locking DARM (see 40m/16968)

What we did:
- Reverted to C1:LSC-ETMX_GAIN = 1
- XARM was locked using POX11_I_ERR (42dB whitening gain, 132.95 deg for demod phase) with ETMX and C1:LSC-XARM_GAIN=0.06
- YARM was locked using POY11_I_ERR (18dB whitening gain, -66.00 deg for demod phase) with ETMX and C1:LSC-YARM_GAIN=0.02
- OLTFs for each was measured to be Attachment #1; UGF was ~180 Hz for XARM, ~200 Hz for YARM.
- Measured TF from C1:LSC-(E|I)TM(X|Y)_EXC to C1:LSC-(X|Y)ARM_IN1 (see Attachment #2)
- Took the ratio between ITM actuation and ETM actuation to calculate ETM actuation. For ITM actuation, we used the value measured using MICH (see 40m/16929). The average of the ratio in the frequency range 70-150 Hz was used.

Files:
- Measurement files live in https://git.ligo.org/40m/measurements/-/tree/main/LSC/XARM and YARM
- Script for calculation lives at https://git.ligo.org/40m/scripts/-/blob/main/CAL/ARM/ETMActuatorCalibration.ipynb

Discussion:
- ETMX actuation is 4.12 times less compared with ETMY. This is more or less consistent with what we measured in 40m/16968, but we didn't do loop-correction at that time.
- We should check if this imbalance is as expected or not.

Summary of actuation calibration so far:
BS   : 26.08e-9 /f^2 m/counts (see 40m/16929)
ITMX :  5.29e-9 /f^2 m/counts (see 40m/16929)
ITMY :  4.74e-9 /f^2 m/counts (see 40m/16929)
ETMX :  2.65e-9 /f^2 m/counts (0.5007 times ITMX) ETMY : 10.91e-9 /f^2 m/counts (2.3017 times ITMY)

Attachment 1: Screenshot_2022-07-05_14-52-01_OLTF.png
Attachment 2: Screenshot_2022-07-05_14-54-03_TF.png
Attachment 3: Screenshot_2022-07-05_14-56-41_Ratio.png
16929   Fri Jun 17 16:22:21 2022 yutaUpdateLSCActuator calibration of BS. ITMX, ITMY, updated MICH displacement spectra from c1cal

Following what we have done in 2013 (40m/8242), actuator calibration was done using MICH.

AS55_Q in MICH : 9.74e8 counts/m
BS   : 26.08e-9 /f^2 m/counts
ITMX : 5.29e-9 /f^2 m/counts
ITMY : 4.74e-9 /f^2 m/counts

Optical gain is 25% lower than the measurement in June 6 (40m/16892), probably because our estimate was too rough then and also we now have ~15% lower IMC transmission.
Actuator gains are 2-30% higher than the measurement in 2013.

MICH error signal calibration:
C1:LSC-AS55_Q_ERR was calibrated by taking data with C1:LSC-ASDC_OUT, when Michelson was aligned and free swinging (Attachment #1).
AS55_Q and ASDC were X-Y plotted and fitted with ellipse to get an amplitude of AS55_Q to be 82.51 counts (Attachment #2).
4*pi*A/lambda gives you 9.74e8 counts/m, where meters are in terms of difference between BS to ITMX length and BS to ITMY length.
Jupyter notebook: https://git.ligo.org/40m/scripts/-/blob/main/CAL/MICH/MICHOpticalGainCalibration.ipynb

Openloop transfer function for actuator calibration:
C1:LSC-MICH_GAIN was lowered to -1 (instead of -6), and some of filters are turned off to make the MICH UGF to be ~10.
Also, ellip("LowPass",4,1,40,50) was added to C1:LSC-MICH_A filter bank to cut the feedback above 50 Hz, so that the loop does not suppress the measurement.
The configuration is in Attachment #3.

Actuator calibration of BS, ITMX, ITMY:
With this MICH OLG, transfer functions from C1:LSC-BS,ITMX,ITMY_EXC to C1:LSC-AS55_Q_ERR were measured.
AS55_Q was calibrated to meters using the calibration factor above, and fitted the transfer function with 1/f^2 in 70-150 Hz range to get the actuator efficiency mentioned above (Attachement #4).
Thus, meters in this calibration is in terms of ITM POS motion (not in BS POS motion).
Jupyter notebook: https://git.ligo.org/40m/scripts/-/blob/main/CAL/MICH/MICHActuatorCalibration.ipynb

MICH displacement noise:
Measured values were added to c1cal model as follows.
C1:CAL-MICH_CINV FM2: 1/9.74e8 = 1.03e-9
C1:CAL-MICH_A FM2: 2.608e-8 (it was 2.07e-8 from 2013!)
C1:CAL-MICH_A_GAIN = 0.5 to take into account of C1:LSC-OUTPUT_MTRX_8_2=0.5 in the LSC output matrix for BS
Spectrum of C1:CAL-MICH_W_OUT (now calibrated in nm) with configuration in Attachment #5 was taken.
Attachement #6 is the result. I also took the spectrum with PSL shutter off to measure the sensing noise. The sensing noise limits our sensitivity above ~40 Hz at 5e-11 m/rtHz.

Attachment 1: MICHOpticalGainCalibrationFig1.png
Attachment 2: MICHOpticalGainCalibrationFig2.png
Attachment 3: Screenshot_2022-06-17_14-23-04_MICHOLTF_ActuatorCalibration.png
Attachment 4: MICHActuatorCalibration.png
Attachment 5: Screenshot_2022-06-17_15-54-41_MICHCalibrationFilters.png
Attachment 6: Screenshot_2022-06-17_15-53-41_MICHDisplacement.png
14558   Fri Apr 19 16:19:42 2019 gautamUpdateSUSActuation matrix still not orthogonal

I repeated the exercise from yesterday, this time driving the butterfly mode [+1 -1 -1 +1] and adding the tuned PIT and YAW vectors from yesterday to it to minimize appearance in the Oplev error signals.

The measured output matrix is $\begin{bmatrix} 0.98 & 0.64 & 1.5 & 1.037 \\ 0.96 & 1.12 & -0.5 & -0.998 \\ 1.04 & -1.12 & 0.5 & -1.002 \\ 1.02 & -0.64 & -1.5 & 0.963 \end{bmatrix}$, where rows are the coils in the order [UL,UR,LL,LR] and columns are the DOFs in the order [POS,PIT,YAW,Butterfly]. The conclusions from my previous elog still hold though - the orthogonality between PIT and YAW is poor, so this output matrix cannot be realized by a simple gain scaling of the coil output gains. The "adjustment matrix", i.e. the 4x4 matrix that we must multiply the "ideal" output matrix by to get the measured output matrix has a condition number of 134 (1 is a good condition number, signifies closeness to the identity matrix).

 Quote: let us have 3 by 4, nevermore so that the number of columns is no less and no more than the number of rows so that forevermore we live as 4 by 4
14559   Fri Apr 19 19:22:15 2019 ranaUpdateSUSActuation matrix still not orthogonal

If thy left hand troubles thee

then let the mirror show the right

for if it troubles enough to cut it off

it would not offend thy sight

13746   Wed Apr 11 01:34:31 2018 gautamUpdateIOOActivities today

[kevin, gautam]

activities done today - details/plots/data/evidence tomorrow.

1. Checked XARM loop shape. Updated NB code to fetch POX data from NDS and undo loop shape rather than using calibration filter bank.
2. Checked POX loop calibration (m/ct). Number I was using was 8e-13. Tonight we measured 9e-13. Updated filter bank.
3. Tried to get Y arm green ALS going.
• Improved GTRY from ~0.05 to 0.3.
• Tried to improve mode matching onto BBPD on PSL table to see a green beat.
• But we were unsuccessful.
• I think I got the near and far field alignment right, and the EY laser temp is set such that I can see an IR beat @~30MHz (so green beat should be at 60 MHz).
• But I couldn't see anything with scope or with HP spec analyzer.
• More tomorrow. Motivation to get green ALS working is to get some more confidence that the excess noise is indeed on the PSL light.
3917   Sun Nov 14 16:40:46 2010 JenneUpdateTreasureActivities related to OSEM measurement

[Valera, Jenne]

We pondered the idea of clamping the PRM optic to measure the OSEM noise.  So we opened up the BS tank to give this a try.  We rediscovered that Jenne is too short to reach the other side of the PRM tower, so we couldn't fully clamp the optic (when is Jaime coming again? He's kind of tall...)  If we only did the back 2 EQ stops, the optic would still be able to rock, and thus defeat the purpose of clamping anyway.  So we didn't go for it.

While we were in there we saw that the SRM OSEMs were just hanging out on the table, and decided to go with them.  See Valera's elog for details on our measurement.  We closed up the tank without making any changes to anything.

In other news, we still need to figure out how to change up the connectors to get those OSEMs over to the ITM table.  This needs to happen pretty soonish.

5696   Wed Oct 19 12:25:58 2011 SureshUpdate40m UpgradingActive Tiptilts from LLO moved to clean shelf along X arm

I have moved the active tip tilts that we brought over from LLO to the Clean Bureau along the X arm (closest to the ETMX). There are two tip tilts and a pack of spare parts.

5697   Wed Oct 19 13:45:11 2011 SureshUpdate40m UpgradingActive Tiptilts from LLO moved to clean shelf along X arm

I have moved the active tip tilts that we brought over from LLO to the Clean Bureau along the X arm (closest to the ETMX). There are two tip tilts and a pack of spare parts.  I am sure that the tip tilts are clean, packed in the clean room at LLO.  I am not sure whether the spares are clean.  I have kept them together for now.

We need to open one of the Tip tilt packages to be sure what we have got.

3690   Mon Oct 11 17:31:44 2010 yutaUpdateCDSActivation of DAQ channels for 8 optics

(Joe, Yuta)

Background:
We need DAQ channels activated to measure Q-values of the ringdowns for each DOF, each optics with the Dataviewer.

What we did:
1. Activated the following DAQ using daqconfig (in /cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts).
C1:SUS-XX_AASEN_IN1
C1:SUS-XX_SUSBBB_IN1
C1:RMS-YYY_AASEN_IN1
C1:RMS-YYY_SUSBBB_IN1
C1:MCS-ZZZ_AASEN_IN1
C1:MCS-ZZZ_SUSBBB_IN1
(XX=BS,ITMX,ITMY  YYY=PRM,SRM  ZZZ=MC1,MC2,MC3  AA=UL,UR,LR,LL,SD  BBB=POS,PIT,YAW)

2. Set datarate to 2048 for each DAQ.

3. Restarted fb(frame builder).

Result:
We succeeded in making DAQ channels appear in the Dataviewer signal list, but we can't start the measurement because c1mcs is still flaky.

Note:
We found that c1mcs crashes everytime when turning off all the damping servo (using "Damp" buttons on the medm screen).
It doesn't crash when all the filters are off.

3691   Mon Oct 11 20:52:00 2010 ranaUpdateCDSActivation of DAQ channels for 8 optics

Bah!  We tried to get some data but totally failed. It seems like there is some rudimentary functionality in the FE process of the MC, but no useful DAQ at all.

Neither Dataview or DTT had anything. We looked and the NDS process and the DAQD process were not running on FB.

I restarted them both (./daqd -c daqdrc) & (./nds pipe > nds.log) but couldn't get anything.

There's a bunch of errors in the daqd.log like this:

CA.Client.Exception...............................................
Warning: "Identical process variable names on multiple servers"
Context: "Channel: "C1:SUS-MC1_SUSPOS_INMON", Connecting to: c1susdaq:57416, Ignored: c1sus.martian:57416"
Source File: ../cac.cpp line 1208
Current Time: Mon Oct 11 2010 18:25:15.475629328
..................................................................
CA.Client.Exception...............................................
Warning: "Identical process variable names on multiple servers"
Context: "Channel: "C1:SUS-MC1_SUSPIT_INMON", Connecting to: c1susdaq:57416, Ignored: c1sus.martian:57416"
Source File: ../cac.cpp line 1208
Current Time: Mon Oct 11 2010 18:25:15.475900124

15945   Fri Mar 19 15:26:19 2021 AidanUpdateComputersActivated MATLAB license on megatron

15946   Fri Mar 19 15:31:56 2021 AidanUpdateComputersActivated MATLAB license on donatella

5524   Thu Sep 22 22:53:06 2011 SureshUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsActivated DAQ channels in C1IOO model and restared fb

To look at the WFS servo signals I was using test points in the servo filter banks.  This is not recommended for regular operation since acquiring the testpoint data at 16k loads the fb. Instead, I ran the daqconfig script from the scripts directory and activated the IN1_DQ, IN2_DQ and OUT_DQ channels in all the six servo filter banks (at 2048 Hz sampling rate) and then restarted the fb.   However the c1ioo Sun machine stopped responding after this.  Koji and I went in to see what was going on and the machine was not reponding to a keyboard plugged directly into the machine.  The screen display showed no reponse to our key press.  So we did a hardware reboot with the tiny switch in front of the machine.  It came up okay and all the c1ioo models were back in action.

I then checked with the dataviewer to make sure that I can see the trends on the newly activated DQ channels.  They were all fine.

6210   Wed Jan 18 12:38:44 2012 steveUpdatePEMAcrylic plexiglass transmittance

Transparent- clear plexyglass from tree different sources were measured in 1064 and 532 nm light.

Samples: a, clear Acrylic-GP 0F00  from Ridout Plastics in thickness 0.7" ,  made by  Evonic Ind

b, clear cast acrylic from Mc Master Carr in thickness 0.94" , likely  made by Reynolds-Cast

c, clear cell cast  plexyglass from Delvie's Plastics - Utah in thickness  0.93" , maker not known

PMC reflected beam was used at 92 mW and 6 mm diameter at incident angle 0-25 degrees.

All tree samples agreed on Transmittance of ~90%, Reflectivity ~3-4% and calculated Adsorption ~6-7%

Transparent Colored Acrylic orange-amber #2422   from www.eplastics.com in 0.12" thickness gave  T 96%,  R 1% and  Ab-calc ~3% in the beam of 92 mW 1064  nm at 6 mm diameter.

Transparent , colored   Light Red #26 thin film filter   policarbonate-polyester   0.002" thick   from Roscolux measured T 81% of 115 mW 1064 nm

Now I changed power meter FieldMate to Ophir and the light source to laser pointer 2.2 mW  ~532 nm  with 1-2 mm beam diameter.

Orange - amber #2422  sample, 0.12" thick,  T 1% ,  R 4%  and  Ab-calculated ~95%, estimated visibility  ~50% It does cut out the green at this low power level.

Light red #26  sample  T 0.5%  at 2.5 mW of 532 nm . The transparent green is not visible.  The softening point of this sandwiched polycarbonate-polyecter filter is 160C. Estimated VLT of this film ~40%

SUMMERY:

Clear and colored acrylics'  @ 1064 nm  transmittance 90% or higher  regardless of thickness. Softenig point 115 degrees C

Colored acrylic and colored policarbonate film are adsorbing the low power green and they  transmit the 1064nm beam.

ELOG V3.1.3-