40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 329 of 335  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Category Subjectup
  12388   Tue Aug 9 16:19:27 2016 SteveUpdateSUStorque driver for wire clamp

New Wiha 28504 torque wrench for SOS wire clamping. It's range 7.5  - 20 in-lb in 0.5 steps [ 0.9 - 2.2 Nm ] Audible and perceptible click when the pre-set torque has been attained at ±6% accuracy.  

The new ETMX sus wire torqued to ~ 11.5 in-lb [1.3 Nm ]

Quote:

Gautam and Steve,

The clamp's left side was jammed onto the left guide pin. It was installed slit facing left. Gautam had to use force to remove it. The clamp should move freely seating on the guide rods till torque aplied. Do not move on with the hanging of optic with a jammed clamp. Fix it.

Never use force as you are hanging - aligning optic. The clamp is in the shop for resurfacing and slit opening.

 

 

  11239   Thu Apr 23 15:40:41 2015 SteveUpdateGeneraltorque for 1/4-20

 

Few 1/4 -20 socket cap head screw with washers were tested for optimum torque.

QJR 117E Snap On  torque wrench was used. I found that 40 lb in was enough.

Looked up recommended values on the web later:

Our Thorlab SS 1/4-20 screw kits are SS 18-8 as DRY 70 inch / lbs max, lubricated  60 inch / lbs max

These numbers will varie with washers, material it's going into and so on!

BLACK-OXIDE Alloy Steel Socket Head Cap Screws can go much higher value

Thread Size 1/4"-20
Length 1/4"
Thread Length Full
Additional Specifications Black-Oxide Alloy Steel
RoHS Compliant

The standard among high-strength fasteners, these screws are stronger than Grade 8 steel screws. They have a minimum tensile strength of 170,000 psi. and a minimum Rockwell hardness of C37. Length is measured from under the head.

Inch screws have a Class 3A thread fit. They meet ASTM A574.

Black Oxide—Screws have been heat-treated for hardness, which results in a dark surface color.

 
The information in this 3-D model is provided for reference only. Details
 
 

We still do not know that what torque values we get best performance : minimum jiggel and drift etc.

After looking at these numbers I raise my recommendation to 50 inch / lbs on a std aplication.

Rana is next to calibrate his feelings and declare the right number.

Than Koji....and so on

Once we a number, than I buy more torque wrenches to fit it.

  11244   Fri Apr 24 18:13:36 2015 ranaUpdateGeneraltorque for 1/4-20

For 1/4-20 bolts made of 18-8 Stainless Steel, the recommended torque varies from 65-100 inch-pounds, depending upon the application, the lubrication, how loose the bolt is, if there's a washer, etc.

For our case, where we are going into a tapped, ferromagnetic stainless table, its less clear, but it will certainly by in the 60-80 range. This is close to the 5-6 foot-lbs that I recommended on Wednesday.

I've ordered 3 torque wrenches with 1/4" drive so that we can have one at each end and one in the toolbox near MC2. We'll indicate the recommended torque on there so that we can tighten everything appropriately.

  11181   Sat Mar 28 03:21:49 2015 denUpdateLSCtowards angular ff

Tonight I measured seismic noise coupling to beam spot on PR2. There is coherence of 0.9 from X to PIT and Y to YAW around the stack resonances. TF was fited using vectfit and put into static matrix of oaf in the elements T240X -> PRM PIT, T240Y -> PRM YAW. I think we should actuate on the error point of the PRM OL but I decided not to go for a model change tonight. Data from seismometers and POP QPD was obtained during the UTC time 04:06:00 - 04:50:00 when PRMI was locked on sideband

Interferometer was locking rather robustly and every lock lasted on the everage of 3 minutes. During these lock periods I incresed bandwidth of optical lever servos of BS and test masses from 4Hz up to 10Hz and then closed transmission QPD loops. It seems from the camera that lock losses correspond to strong motion of the beam on pop camera. Scripts that change OPLEV bandwidth are in /users/den "increase_ol_bandwidth.sh" "decrease_ol_bandwidth.sh". Script "engage_qpd_servos" turns off ETM oplevs and turns on ETM -> trans QPD servos. These scripts can be copied to locking directrly if are useful.

Please, note that transition from 3f to 1f should still be tuned. Only PRCL was stably controlled using 1f so far

  388   Fri Mar 21 09:02:03 2008 steveUpdateVACtp 2 failed
Small turbo #2 is the forepump of the maglev.
It failed last night, shut down the maglev and interlock closed V1
Ifo pressure is 20 mTorr now. The Yarm was still locked at 8am this morning.
The PSL beam to MC was blocked just before the output periscope.
The psl mechanial shutter did not work from epic screen.
  389   Fri Mar 21 11:54:38 2008 robUpdateVACtp 2 failed

Quote:
Small turbo #2 is the forepump of the maglev.
It failed last night, shut down the maglev and interlock closed V1
Ifo pressure is 20 mTorr now. The Yarm was still locked at 8am this morning.
The PSL beam to MC was blocked just before the output periscope.
The psl mechanial shutter did not work from epic screen.


The PSL mechanical shutter actually did trip last night, greatly confusing me and Rana. Not realizing that the software vacuum interlock had tripped, we manually re-opened the shutter. I'll modify the relevant MEDM screens to indicate when the EPICS interlock trips.
  385   Thu Mar 20 15:28:20 2008 steveUpdateVACtp2 's drypump replaced
The fore pump of tp2 was replaced at fore line pressure 998m Torr
  1220   Fri Jan 9 16:52:18 2009 steveUpdateVACtp3 forline pump replaced
Alberto took 40m vacuum 101 class as we replaced the drypump at the annulus pump line.

He is still not authorized to use the monster 2 3/8" open end wrench that is 36" long.

The fore line pressure dropped to 20 mTorr from 1 Torr as the pumps were swapped.
Bob needs to be given credit for replacing the tip seal on this Varian SH-100 drypump
The ss-hose felt dry at the tp3 exhaust end but it was some what "teflon coated-placticky-
-almost oily" at intake end of the dry pump.
We'll have to replace this metal hose next time.

This is a reminder that the 40m vacuum operation is fully manual.
It requires two people to switch a vacuum valve and one of them has to be experienced.
  2970   Fri May 21 16:37:35 2010 steveConfigurationVACtp3's drypump replaced

Bob replaced the tipseal in an other drypump and I swapped it in. TP3 turbo is running again, it's foreline pressure is 40 mTorr. The RGA is still off

  2073   Fri Oct 9 01:31:56 2009 ranaConfigurationDAQtpchn mystery

Does anyone know if this master file is the real thing that's in use now? Are we really using a file called tpchn_C1_new.par? If anyone sees Alex, please get to the bottom of this.

allegra:daq>pwd
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq
allegra:daq>more master
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1ADCU_PEM.ini
#/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1ADCU_SUS.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1LSC.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1ASC.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SOS.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS_EX.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS_EY.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS1.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS2.ini
#/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS4.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1IOOF.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1IOO.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C0GDS.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C0EDCU.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1OMC.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1ASS.ini
/cvs/cds/gds/param/tpchn_C1_new.par
/cvs/cds/gds/param/tpchn_C2.par
/cvs/cds/gds/param/tpchn_C3.par

  2075   Fri Oct 9 14:23:53 2009 Alex IvanovConfigurationDAQtpchn mystery

"Yes. This master file is used."

Quote:

Does anyone know if this master file is the real thing that's in use now? Are we really using a file called tpchn_C1_new.par? If anyone sees Alex, please get to the bottom of this.

allegra:daq>pwd
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq
allegra:daq>more master
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1ADCU_PEM.ini
#/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1ADCU_SUS.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1LSC.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1ASC.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SOS.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS_EX.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS_EY.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS1.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS2.ini
#/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1SUS4.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1IOOF.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1IOO.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C0GDS.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C0EDCU.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1OMC.ini
/cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq/C1ASS.ini
/cvs/cds/gds/param/tpchn_C1_new.par
/cvs/cds/gds/param/tpchn_C2.par
/cvs/cds/gds/param/tpchn_C3.par

 

  94   Mon Nov 12 14:09:19 2007 robDAQGeneraltpman dead on fb40m
The testpoint manager was dead on fb40m. I know I re-started it sometime after the power outage, so something must have killed it. If you get an error from DTT like
"diagnostic kernel does not support: testpoints", then log into fb40m as root, check for the tpman with a ps -ef | grep tpman. If it's not there, then run /usr/controls/tpman & and close the terminal window.
  1417   Sun Mar 22 23:16:41 2009 ranaDAQComputer Scripts / Programstpman restart
Could get testpoints but couldn't start excitations. Restarted tpman on daqawg. Works now.

Still no log file. Mad
  10869   Wed Jan 7 14:16:27 2015 JenneUpdateLSCtrans QPDs realigned

Now that both end transmission QPDs have the line filters, I aligned them.

I locked and aligned the IR using the ASS, then went to each end table and put the beam in the center of the QPD.

  2494   Sun Jan 10 13:32:09 2010 HaixingUpdateSUStransfer function measurement of the quadrant maglev circuit

I have assembled the circuit and the control box for the quadrant magnetic levitation yesterday. The final setup is shown

in the figure below:

Quad_maglev_ctrl_box_in.JPGQuad_maglev_ctrl_box_front.JPG

 

Due to my carelessness, I I connected the wrong ends of the power supply. I damaged 4 op-amp and one voltage 

regulator during this assembly. This stupid mistake spent me several hours to fix, and I got a bitter lesson;-(

 

Afterwards, I replaced those op-amps and reconnected the power supply . Kiwamu helped me and we measured

the transfer function of this circuit.  The transfer function agrees with  the specification in the schematics which

has a integrator below 1 Hz and a differentiator from 5 to 20 Hz. The bode plot for the measured transfer function

is the following:

quad_mag_tf_amp.png

 quad_mag_tf_phs.png

Today I tested the photodetector parts and found that there is a mysterious oscillation. Whenever I connect the

photodector input A of the circuit (as indicated in the figure below),

PD.PNG

the output of the op-amp has a 500k Hz oscillation shown up in the oscilloscope.This happens even A is disconnected from

the photodetector and connected to an open end wire. I don't know how to eliminate it, and its amplitude is so large (peak to

peak is around 2.5 V) which completely dominates the photodetector output. Does anybody has some ideas? Thanks.

 

Quad_mag_lev_osc.JPG

  2495   Sun Jan 10 15:47:26 2010 KojiUpdateSUStransfer function measurement of the quadrant maglev circuit

1. Why do all of the BNCs have no GND connection? Each should have the individual cables to the ground. Each signal line and the corresponding ground line should be twisted together.

2. This looks the (usual) oscillation of the V-I conversion stage but I can't tell anything as I don't have the circuit diagram of the whole circuit.

3. In a certain case, putting some capacitance at the feedback may help. Read P.11 of the data sheet of LT1125. Try to put some capacitors from 20pF to some larger one whether it changes the situation or not. I suppose the bandwidth of your sensor can be ~1kHz. So putting a capacitance less than 10nF still has no effect to the servo.

  2497   Sun Jan 10 16:50:34 2010 HaixingUpdateSUStransfer function measurement of the quadrant maglev circuit

Quote:

1. Why do all of the BNCs have no GND connection? Each should have the individual cables to the ground. Each signal line and the corresponding ground line should be twisted together.

2. This looks the (usual) oscillation of the V-I conversion stage but I can't tell anything as I don't have the circuit diagram of the whole circuit.

3. In a certain case, putting some capacitance at the feedback may help. Read P.11 of the data sheet of LT1125. Try to put some capacitors from 20pF to some larger one whether it changes the situation or not. I suppose the bandwidth of your sensor can be ~1kHz. So putting a capacitance less than 10nF still has no effect to the servo.

 1. They are all connected to the box which has a single connection to the board ground. If I connect each of them to the ground, there would be many small loops

of ground. Of course, I should have replaced all the connectors such that the they are disconnected to the box as point out by Robert.

2. The oscillation disappears after I add 5 nF capacitor in parallel to the existing resistor. Thank you very much for pointing this out.

  2498   Sun Jan 10 17:15:25 2010 KojiUpdateSUStransfer function measurement of the quadrant maglev circuit

1. Yes. That is the bad. You should eventually replace the BNCs to the isolated ones.

2. OK. I like to emphasize again that everyone works on electronics should read data sheets more carefully and seriously because they have many important practical instructions to exploit full performance of the components. 

Quote:

Quote:

1. Why do all of the BNCs have no GND connection? Each should have the individual cables to the ground. Each signal line and the corresponding ground line should be twisted together.

2. This looks the (usual) oscillation of the V-I conversion stage but I can't tell anything as I don't have the circuit diagram of the whole circuit.

3. In a certain case, putting some capacitance at the feedback may help. Read P.11 of the data sheet of LT1125. Try to put some capacitors from 20pF to some larger one whether it changes the situation or not. I suppose the bandwidth of your sensor can be ~1kHz. So putting a capacitance less than 10nF still has no effect to the servo.

 1. They are all connected to the box which has a single connection to the board ground. If I connect each of them to the ground, there would be many small loops

of ground. Of course, I should have replaced all the connectors such that the they are disconnected to the box as point out by Robert.

2. The oscillation disappears after I add 5 nF capacitor in parallel to the existing resistor. Thank you very much for pointing this out.

 

  4324   Fri Feb 18 15:05:49 2011 kiwamuUpdateGreen Lockingtransfer function of angle to beat note (length)

[Koji and Kiwamu]

 We took transfer functions (TF) from the angle excitations at ETMX and ITMX to the green beat note signal (i.e. angle to length TF).

It turned out that the coupling from ETMX_PIT is quite large.

I wonder how f2p of the ETMX changes this coupling. We'll see.

 

a2l_TF.png

 

The plot above shows a set of the transfer functions from the angle excitation to the green beat note.

Note that the y-axis has not been calibrated, it is just a unit of counts/counts.

You can see that the TF from ETMX_PIT to the beat (red cruve) is larger than the others by about a factor of 10 over most of the frequency range.

This means that any PIT motions on ETMX can be coupled into the green beat signal somewhat over the wide frequency range.

It looks having a resonance at 1.5 Hz, but we don't exactly know why.

At that time the coil gains on only ITMX were tuned by applying f2p filters, but ETMX wasn't because of a technical reason coming from epics.

 

- - - - measurement conditions

  * PSL laser was locked to X arm by feeding back the IR PDH signal to MC2.

  * the green laser was locked to Xarm as usual.

  * took the green beat note signal (approximately 0 dBm) into Rana's MFD with the cable length of about  6 m.

  * the output from the MFD was connected to XARM_COARSE channel without a whitening filter.

  * excitation signal was injected into either ASC_PIT or ASC_YAW. The excitation was Gaussian noise with frequency band of 10 Hz and amplitude of 300 counts.

  * only ITMY had the f2p filters, which balance the coil gains all over the frequency.

 

  6655   Tue May 22 00:23:45 2012 DenUpdateCDStransmission error monitor

I've started to create channels and an medm screen to monitor the errors that occur during the transmission through the RFM model. The screen will show the amount of lost data per second for each channel.

Not all channels are ready yet. For created channels, number of errors is 0, this is good.

 Screenshot.png

  13330   Mon Sep 25 17:56:33 2017 johannesUpdateComputer Scripts / Programstransmitted power during lossmap

I had to do a reboot + burt restore of c1psl today. It was unresponsive and I couldn't get the PMC to lock. I also had to slightly realign the PMC, and the IMC was too misaligned for the autolocker to catch lock. Adjusting it manually, it was predominantly MC1 PIT that was off. The YARM locked on a 10 mode and had to be aligned manually as well.

I left a script running on Donnatella that tilts ETMX and thus moves the beam on ITMX. I'm monitoring the transmitted power to evaluate sane thresholds for the demodulation offsets in a lossmap measurement. The script will return the IFO to normal after it is done and will take <2 hours to complete (no real clue, but there's no way it takes longer than that for ~50 datapoints).

  6556   Sat Apr 21 21:10:34 2012 JamieUpdateCDStrend frame issue partially resolved

Quote:

Unfortunately it looks like there may be a problem with trend data, though.  If I try to retrieve 1 minute of "full data" with dataviewer for channel C1:SUS-ITMX_SUSPOS_IN1_DQ around GPS 1019089138 everything works fine:

Connecting to NDS Server fb (TCP port 8088)
Connecting.... done
T0=12-04-01-00-17-45; Length=60 (s)
60 seconds of data displayed

but if I specify any trend data (second, minute, etc.) I get the following:

Connecting to NDS Server fb (TCP port 8088)
Connecting.... done
Server error 18: trend data is not available
datasrv: DataWriteTrend failed in daq_send().
T0=12-04-01-00-17-45; Length=60 (s)
No data output.

Alex warned me that this might have happened when I was trying to test the new daqd without first turning off frame writing.

Alex told me that the "trend data is not available" message comes from the "trender" functionality not being enabled in daqd.  After re-enabling it (see #6555) minute trend data was available again.  However, there still seems to be an issue with second trends.  When I try to retrieve second trend data from dataviewer for which minute trend data *is* available I get the following error message:

Connecting to NDS Server fb (TCP port 8088)
Connecting.... done
No data found

read(); errno=9
read(); errno=9
T0=12-04-04-02-14-29; Length=3600 (s)
No data output.

Awaiting more help from Alex...

  7955   Tue Jan 29 15:16:18 2013 ManasaFrogsGeneraltrial run

 

 I would like to suggest a trial run on these....Ergomates and the cleanboot!

ErgoMatesFeatures.jpg

booties.jpg

REPLY by JCD:  Are these going to trap dirt and be impossible to clean though?  The nice thing about Crocs and the giant flip flops is that they are solid and if they get dirty you can do a quick wipedown, and they're good as new.

  7967   Wed Jan 30 16:24:25 2013 ManasaFrogsGeneraltrial run

Quote:

 

REPLY by JCD:  Are these going to trap dirt and be impossible to clean though?  The nice thing about Crocs and the giant flip flops is that they are solid and if they get dirty you can do a quick wipedown, and they're good as new.

 The Cleanboot is washable and reusable!

  3868   Fri Nov 5 14:06:19 2010 yutaUpdateIOOtried to align MC by A2L measurement

(Suresh, Kiwamu, Yuta)

Summary:
  Lastnight, we locked the MC and tried angle to length(A2L) measurement using my new python script (see elog #3863).
  Although the amount of position script shows looks too big, the response seemed somewhat reasonable.
  Using the results of A2L measurement, we managed to reduce the displacement from the center of the MC optics, but we lost TEM00 mode after changing the incident beam direction and PMC lock got off .
  We restored the alignments and now it is 00, but the displacements got worse than the best we achieved last night.

  I think I have to rethink how to align MC. Even if I could somehow get exact position of the beam, how to align the beam to the center of the optics?

What we did:
  1. At first we tried to align by changing the direction of the incident beam. We found that A2L.py shows opposite direction(lower <-> upper). It was because of my misunderstanding and we agreed that the direction is opposite.

  2. Aligned MC optics without changing the direction of the incident beam. We could understand which directions decrease the displacements from the center, and managed to decrease them.

  3. There seemed to be a limit in aligning the MC optics without changing the incident beam direction. So, we started to change the incident beam direction again by steering mirrors at PSL table.

  4. During the change, PMC lock got off. We restored it, but we lost MC's 00 mode.

  5. We restored MC 00 mode, and measured the final A2L. The result was worse than we achieved by step #2.

Result:
  The final result from last night using my script was as follows;

  MC1 MC2 MC3
vertical 36% -19% 19%
horizontal 49% 6% -37%

  % is the length compared to the half of coil to coil length. Low / right are positive.
  We can see the beam position got better by looking at the monitor from MC2, and the A2L measurement result agrees with that.

  Here's some pictures from the measurement last night. Each plots are not taken at the same time.
A2LmeasurementFigures.png
   (It was painful using slow computers to make measurement. The StripTool graph shows straight lines when computers got frozen)

Plan:
 - Plan a strategy
 - The script needs self-estimation of the measurement. Now, the script fits the plot assuming every data has the same error.
 - When the beam is near the center, the signal gets smaller and the result will be unreliable. One thing I can do is to change TO_COIL gains radically so that the axis of rotation go far from the center.

  3713   Thu Oct 14 01:09:17 2010 yutaUpdateIOOtried to lock MC but failed

(Rana, Koji, Kiwamu, Suresh, Yuta)

 We attempted to lock the MC and finally got flashes of the MC, but no luck. 

Tomorrow we are going to check every components one by one to make sure if everything is okay or not.


Background:
 MC suspensions are well damped now.
 We need MC locked for the alignment of the in-vac optics.

Issues:

  These are the issues which we are going to fix.
1. DC alignment of the MC2 suspension doesn't seem to be working correctly. (see here)

  We should check the satellite box and the cable connection.

  The coils look like woking fine because we can kick MC2 by using each of the coils.


2. Incomplete modematching.

The spot size of the reflected light from MC1 looked like bigger. 

3. beam axis of the injection light to MC1

  6763   Wed Jun 6 02:28:02 2012 yutaUpdateGreen Lockingtried to see Yarm length change with weak beat note

[Jenne, Yuta]

Summary:
  We tried to see the Yarm length change using Yarm green beat note. The beat note is still puny, so we put an extra amplifier. We saw something, but still can't control the arm length with ALS.

What we did:
  1. Aligned Y arm and PSL green optics as usual.

  2. By changing the temperature of the PSL laser with C1:PSL-FSS_SLOWDC, we find small beat note when

  PSL laser temperature on display: 30.59 deg C (PSL HEPA 100%)
  C1:PSL-FSS_SLOWDC = 5.2100
  Y end laser "T+": 34.049 deg C
  Y end laser "ADJ": 0
  Y end laser measured temperature: 34.68 deg C (*)
  C1:GCY-SLOW_SERVO2_OFFSET = 29425

 (*) Measured using diagnostic output on the back of the laser controller(Lightwave 125/6-OPN-PS) - between pins 2(GND) and 4. Calbration factor is 10 degC/V.

  3. The peak height right after the amplifier on the Y green beat PD was ~ -48dBm, so we put another amplifier (and attenuator) because the beat note which goes into the frequency divier should be -30 dBm to +7 dBm. After we put the amplifier, the peak height was ~ -23 dBm.

  4. We could see the C1:ALS-BEATY_COARSE_I_ERR ringing down, when opening and closing the control room door, which may introduce Y arm length change(screenshot of dataviewer below). But we are still not sure if we are actually getting the Y arm length signal because closing and opening Y end green shutter doesn't make difference on C1:ALS-BEATY_COARSE_I_ERR. The ring down was seen when we turned on the unWhiten filters in C1:ALS-BEATY_COARSE filter modules.

beatycoarseringdown20120605.png

  5. Tried to hold Y arm length with ALS, but couldn't.

Current setup:
  Red ones are the ones we added or changed.

beatysetup20120605.png

Note:
  Dataviewer is so slow and flakey now.

  4671   Mon May 9 18:54:29 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCtriggerd locking logic : screen prepared

I made a new medm screen for the triggering logics. Have fun.

I put a button on C1LSC.adl to invoke this screen.

trigger_medm.png

Quote from #4656

It will be quite useful for the Y arm locking, for instance we can do a triggered locking and the maximization of the intracavity power.

 

  7055   Tue Jul 31 00:27:52 2012 DenUpdatePEMtrillium

We have a Trillium for several days from Vladimir. I've put seismometer inside the foam box on linolium. I was not able to level the seismometer on granite as this Trillium does not have level screws. Does anybody know where they are?  Readout box stands on the foam box as seismometer cable is short (~2 meters).

Cables go to STS1 inputs (7-9) on ADC 3.

  11109   Fri Mar 6 13:48:17 2015 dark kiwamuSummaryIOOtriple resonance circuit

I was asked by Koji to point out where a schematic of the triple resonant circuit is.
It seems that I had posted a schematic of what currently is installed (see elog 4562 from almost 4 yrs ago!).

(Some transfomer story)
Then I immediately noticed that it did not show two components which were wideband RF transformers. In order to get an effective turns ratio of 1:9.8 (as indicated in the schematic) from a CoilCrfat's transformer kit in the electronics table, I had put two more transformers in series to a PWB1040L which is shown in the schematic. If I am not mistaken, this PWB1040L must be followed by a PWB1015L and PWB-16-AL in the order from the input side to the EOM side. This gives an impedance ratio of 96 or an effective turns ratio of sqrt(96) = 9.8.

(An upgrade plan document)

Also, if one wants to review and/or upgrade the circuit, this document may be helpful:
https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/Electronics/Multi_Resonant_EOM?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=design_EOM.pdf
This is a document that I wrote some time ago describing how I wanted to make the circuit better. Apparently I did not get a chance to do it.

  2596   Fri Feb 12 13:15:41 2010 kiwamuUpdateElectronicstriple resonant EOM --- liniaryity test

I have measured the linearity of our triple resonant EOM (i.e. modulation depth versus applied voltage)

The attached figure is the measured modulation depth as a function of the applied voltage.

The linear behavior is shown below 4Vrms, this is good.

Then it is  slowly saturated as the applied voltage goes up above 4Vrms.

However for the resonance of 29.5MHz, it is difficult to measure below 7Vrms because of the small modulation depth.

Our triple resonant EOM looks healthy

 - - - - result from fitting - - -

11MHz: 91mrad/Vrms+2.0mrad

29.5MHz: 4.6mrad/Vrms+6.2mrad

55MHz:82mrad/Vrms+1.0mrad

  2602   Sat Feb 13 13:21:53 2010 KojiUpdateElectronicstriple resonant EOM --- liniaryity test

Looks good. I just thought of the idea that we also can use Alberto's PLL setup to sense the modulation with more sensitivity.  ;-)

Quote:

I have measured the linearity of our triple resonant EOM (i.e. modulation depth versus applied voltage)

The attached figure is the measured modulation depth as a function of the applied voltage.

The linear behavior is shown below 4Vrms, this is good.

Then it is  slowly saturated as the applied voltage goes up above 4Vrms.

However for the resonance of 29.5MHz, it is difficult to measure below 7Vrms because of the small modulation depth.

Our triple resonant EOM looks healthy

 - - - - result from fitting - - -

11MHz: 910mrad/Vrms+20mrad

29.5MHz: 46mrad/Vrms+6.2mrad

55MHz:820mrad/Vrms+10mrad

 

  2586   Wed Feb 10 17:28:02 2010 kiwamuUpdateElectronicstriple resonant EOM ---- preliminary result

I have made a prototype circuit of the triple resonant EOM.

The attached is the measured optical response of the system.

The measured gains at the resonances are 8.6, 0.6 and 7.7 for 11MHz, 29.5MHz and 55MHz respectively.

I successfully got nice peaks at 11MHz and 55MHz. In addition resultant optical response is well matched with the predicted curve from the measured impedance.

However there is a difference from calculated response (see past entry) (i.e. more gains were expected)

Especially for the resonance of 29.5MHz, it was calculated to have gain of 10, however it's now 0.6. Therefore there must a big loss electrically around 29.5MHz.

I am going to re-analyze the impedance and model the performance in order to see what is going on.

  2587   Wed Feb 10 23:15:37 2010 KojiUpdateElectronicstriple resonant EOM ---- preliminary result

Hey, this looks nice, but can you provide us the comparison of rad/V with the resonant EOM of New Focus?

Quote:

I have made a prototype circuit of the triple resonant EOM.

The attached is the measured optical response of the system.

The measured gains at the resonances are 8.6, 0.6 and 7.7 for 11MHz, 29.5MHz and 55MHz respectively.

I successfully got nice peaks at 11MHz and 55MHz. In addition resultant optical response is well matched with the predicted curve from the measured impedance.

However there is a difference from calculated response (see past entry) (i.e. more gains were expected)

Especially for the resonance of 29.5MHz, it was calculated to have gain of 10, however it's now 0.6. Therefore there must a big loss electrically around 29.5MHz.

I am going to re-analyze the impedance and model the performance in order to see what is going on.

 

  2590   Thu Feb 11 16:52:53 2010 kiwamuUpdateElectronicstriple resonant EOM ---- preliminary result

The commercial resonant EOM of New Focus has the modulation efficiency of 50-150mrad/Vrms. ( This number is only true for those EOM made from KTP such as model4063 and model4463 )

Our triple-resonant EOM (made from KTP as well) has a 90mrad/Vrms and 80mrad/Vrms at the reosonances of 11MHz and 55MHz respectively.

Therefore our EOM is as good as those of company-made so that we can establish a new EOM company

Quote:

Hey, this looks nice, but can you provide us the comparison of rad/V with the resonant EOM of New Focus?

Quote:

I have made a prototype circuit of the triple resonant EOM.

The attached is the measured optical response of the system.

The measured gains at the resonances are 8.6, 0.6 and 7.7 for 11MHz, 29.5MHz and 55MHz respectively.

I successfully got nice peaks at 11MHz and 55MHz. In addition resultant optical response is well matched with the predicted curve from the measured impedance.

However there is a difference from calculated response (see past entry) (i.e. more gains were expected)

Especially for the resonance of 29.5MHz, it was calculated to have gain of 10, however it's now 0.6. Therefore there must a big loss electrically around 29.5MHz.

I am going to re-analyze the impedance and model the performance in order to see what is going on.

 

 

  5339   Sat Sep 3 14:47:50 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOtriple resonant box : brief estimations about reflections and mode. depths

(RF reflections)

The reflected RF power going back to the RF generation box will be :

    Power at 11MHz =  2 dBm

   Power at 29.5 MHz = 3 dBm

   Power at 55 MHz = 9dBm

Assuming the input power at 11 and 55 MHz are at 27 dBm (40m wiki page). And 15 dBm for 29.5 MHz.

Since there is an RF combiner in between the generation box and the resonant box, it reduces the reflections by an additional factor of 10 dB (#4517)

In the estimation above, the reduction due to the RF combiner was taken into account.

 

(Modulation depths)

Besides the reflection issue, the circuit meets a rough requirement of 200 mrad at 11 and 55 MHz.

For the 29.5 MHz modulation, the depth will be reduced approximately by a factor of 2, which I don't think it's a significant issue.

So the modulation depths should be okay.

Assuming the performance of the resonant circuit remains the same (#2586), the modulation depths will be :

      Mod. depth at 11 MHz =  280 mrad

      Mod. depth at 29.5 MHz = 4 mrad (This is about half of the current modulation depth)

      Mod. depth at 55 MHz = 250 mrad

 

Quote from #5336

What are the reflected RF powers for those frequencies? 
Is the 29.5MHz more problem than the 55MHz, considering the required modulation depth?

 

  5335   Fri Sep 2 13:12:08 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOtriple resonant box : ready to install

The triple resonant box was checked again. Each resonant frequency was tuned and the box is ready to go.

Before the actual installation I want to hear opinions about RF reflections because the RF reflection at 29 MHz isn't negligible.

It might be a problem since the reflection will go back to the RF generation box and would damage the amplifiers.

 

(Frequency adjustment and resultant reflection coefficient)

In order to tune the resonant frequencies the RF reflection was continuously monitored while the variable inductors were tweaked.

The plot below shows the reflection coefficient of the box after the frequency adjustment. 

refl_eom.png

In the upper plot, where the amplitude of the reflection coefficient of the box is plotted, there are three notches at 11, 29.5 and 55 MHz.

A notch means an RF power, which is applied to the resonant box, is successfully absorbed and consequently the EOM obtains some voltage at this frequency.

These power absorptions take place at the resonant frequencies as we designed so.

A good thing by monitoring this reflection coefficient is that one can easily tune the resonant frequency by looking at the positions of the notches.

Note that :

If amplitude is  0dB ( =1),  it means all of the signal is reflected.

If a circuit under test is impedance matched to 50 Ohm the amplitude will be ideally zero (= -infinity dB).

 

Reflections :

at 11 MHz = -15 dB (3% of RF power is reflected)

at 29.5 MHz = -2 dB (63% of RF power is reflected)

at 55 MHz = -8 dB (15% of RF power is reflected)

  5336   Fri Sep 2 15:56:32 2011 KojiUpdateIOOtriple resonant box : ready to install

What are the reflected RF powers for those frequencies? 
Is the 29.5MHz more problem than the 55MHz, considering the required modulation depth?

 

  2523   Mon Jan 18 23:44:19 2010 kiwamuUpdateElectronicstriple resonant circuit for EOM

The first design of the triple resonant EOM circuit has been done.

If only EOM has a loss of 4 Ohm, the gain of the circuit is expected to be 11 at 55MHz

So far I've worked on investigation of the single resonant circuit and accumulated the knowledge about resonant circuits.

Then I started the next step, designing the triple resonant circuit.

Here I report the first design of the circuit and the expected gain.

 


( What I did )

At first in order to determine the parameters, such as inductors and capacitors, I have solved some equations with numerical ways (see the past entry).

In the calculation I put 6 boundary conditions as followers;

(first peak=11MHz, second peak=29.5MHz, third peak=55MHz, first valley=22MHz, second valley=33MHz, Cp=18pF)

The valley frequencies of 22MHz and 33MHz are chosen in order to eliminate the higher harmonics of 11MHz, and Cp of 18pF represents the capacitance of the EOM.

Basically the number of parameters to be determined is 6 ( L1, L2, ...,), therefore it is completely solved under 6 boundary conditions. And in this case, only one solution exists.

The point is calculation does not include losses because the loss does not change the resonant frequency.

 

whole_circuit.png

( results )

As a result I obtained the 6 parameters for each components shown in the table below.

Cp [pF] 18.1
C1 [pF]  45.5
C2 [pF] 10.0
Lp [uH] 2.33
L1 [uH] 1.15
L2 [uH] 2.33

Then I inserted the loss into the EOM to see how the impedance looks like. The loss is 4 Ohm and inserted in series to the EOM. This number is based on the past measurement .

Let us recall that the gain of the impedance-matched circuit with a transformer is proportional to square-root of the peak impedance.

It is represented by G = sqrt(Zres/50) where Zres is the impedance at the resonance.

 As you can see in the figure, Zres = 6.4 kOhm at 55MHz, therefore the gain will be G=11 at 55MHz.

Essentially this gain is the same as that of the single resonant circuit that I've been worked with, because its performance was also limited mainly by the EOM loss.

 An interesting thing is that all three peaks are exactly on the EOM limited line (black dash line), which is represented by Zres = L/CR = 1/ (2pi f Cp)^2 R. Where R = 4 Ohm.

 designed_circuit.png

( next plan )

There are other solutions to create the same peaks and valleys because of the similar solution.

 It is easy to understand if you put Cp' = Cp x N, the solutions must be scaled like L1'=L1/N, C1'=C1 x N, ...,  Finally such scaling gives the same resonant frequencies.

So the next plan is to study the effect of losses in each components while changing the similar solution.

After the study of the loss I will select an optimum similar solution.

  2524   Tue Jan 19 00:10:44 2010 ranaUpdateElectronicstriple resonant circuit for EOM

Very cool.         

  2526   Tue Jan 19 02:40:38 2010 KojiUpdateElectronicstriple resonant circuit for EOM

The design looks very good. I have some questions.

1. As far as I remember, you've got the gain of slightly worse than 10 for a 55MHz single resonant case. Why your expectation of the gain (G=11) for the highest resonance better than this?

Supposing the loss exists only on the EOM, the other part of the LC network for the triple work as an inductor at the resonant frequency. This is just equivalent as the single resonant case. So the expected gain at 55MHz should coincides with what we already have. Probably, the resistance of 4 Ohm that is used here had too rough precision???

2. How can you adjust the resonances precisely?

Do we need any variable components for Cs and Ls, that may have worse quality than the fixed one, generally speaking.
I myself has no experience that I had to tune the commercial EOM because of a drift or whatever. I hope if you can adjust the resonance with a fixed component it should be fine.

3. Changing Cp. What does it mean?

Do you put additional cap for Cp?

4. The resonances for the lower two look very narrow. Is that fine?

This will show up in a better shape if we look at the transfer function for the gain. Is this right?

If we have BW>100kHz, it is sufficient.

5. Impedance matching for the lower two resonances.

Yep. You know this problem already.

 

  2527   Tue Jan 19 03:04:14 2010 KojiUpdateElectronicstriple resonant circuit for EOM

Self-follow:

I got the answer of Q3 from the follow-up entry.

For Q4, once you get the impedance of the LC network lower than n^2*50, the EOM gain will be quite low. This means that the resonance is anyway narrow.
I did some simple calculation and it shows that the width of the resonance will be 100kHz~500kHz. So it maybe OK.

Quote:

The design looks very good. I have some questions.

1. As far as I remember, you've got the gain of slightly worse than 10 for a 55MHz single resonant case. Why your expectation of the gain (G=11) for the highest resonance better than this?

Supposing the loss exists only on the EOM, the other part of the LC network for the triple work as an inductor at the resonant frequency. This is just equivalent as the single resonant case. So the expected gain at 55MHz should coincides with what we already have. Probably, the resistance of 4 Ohm that is used here had too rough precision???

2. How can you adjust the resonances precisely?

Do we need any variable components for Cs and Ls, that may have worse quality than the fixed one, generally speaking.
I myself has no experience that I had to tune the commercial EOM because of a drift or whatever. I hope if you can adjust the resonance with a fixed component it should be fine.

3. Changing Cp. What does it mean?

Do you put additional cap for Cp?

4. The resonances for the lower two look very narrow. Is that fine?

This will show up in a better shape if we look at the transfer function for the gain. Is this right?

If we have BW>100kHz, it is sufficient.

5. Impedance matching for the lower two resonances.

Yep. You know this problem already. 

 

  3462   Tue Aug 24 11:23:32 2010 steveUpdatePEMtripod leg installation completed

Bertine Robby, Bertin and Jerry completed the installation by pouring concrete yesterday and cleaning up today.

Atm1-2, steel bars, grouted feet and side forms are ready

Atm3,    bounding agent is applied for better bounding

Atm4,    pumping concrete

Atm5,    shaker is used to fill-all

Atm6,    late after noon the forms- sides were removed,     NOTE: actual table to concrete distance is 12.75"

Atm7,    construction people left and the tile man is on the way

 

The tile patching should complete today so tomorrow we can remove plastic covers.

 

  241   Wed Jan 16 14:09:45 2008 robUpdateLSCtuesday's locking

I got a little further with the locking (PRFPMI) last night, after discovering that the cable going from the CM board to the MC board was unplugged at the MC side. This explains why we weren't able to engage the AO path last night. Tonight, I got up to the point where DARM is handed off to OMC transmission, a step which repeatedly failed.
Eventually I realized that although all the lights are the green, the OMC Trans signal was not being updated in the LSC's memory. I suspect this is because the c1ass machine was powered down. Work continues.
  1463   Thu Apr 9 12:23:49 2009 peteUpdateLockingtuning ETM common mode

Pete, Yoichi

Last night, we put the IFO in FP Michelson configuration.  We took transfer functions of CARM and DARM, first using CM excitations directly on the ETMs, and then using modulations of the laser frequency via MC excitation.  We found that there was basically no coupling into DARM using the MC excitation, but that there was coherence in DARM using the ETM excitation.  Therefore, I tuned the ETM common mode in the output matrix.  I did this by taking transfer functions of PD1_Q with PD2_I (see attached plot).  I changed the  drdown_bang script to set C1:LSC-BTMTRX_14 0.98 and C1:LSC-BTMTRX_24 1.02.

  13143   Tue Jul 25 14:04:06 2017 SteveUpdateVACturbo controller installed and we are running at vac normal

Gautam and Steve,

Spare Varian turbo-V 70 controller, Model 969-9505, sn 21612 was swapped in. It is running the turbo fine @ 50Krpm but it does not allow it's V4 valve to be opened............

It turns out that TP2 @ 75Krpm will allow V4 to open and close. This must be a software issue.

So Vacuum Normal is operational if TP2 is running 75,000 rpm

We want to run at 50,000 rpm on the long term.

Note: the RS232 Dsub connector on the back of this controller is mounted 180 degrees opposite than TP3  and old failed TP2 controller

 

PS: controller is shipping out for repair 7-28-2017

 

  4461   Wed Mar 30 16:57:13 2011 kiwamuUpdateGeneralturned off c1aux

[Steve / Kiwamu]

 As a part of the video cable session, we reconnected some power cords on 1Y1 rack.

During the work we momentarily turned off c1aux, which handles DMF, Illumintators, mechanical shutters and the old video epics.

I think it automatically reverted the things, but we may need to check them.

  2479   Tue Jan 5 13:23:45 2010 AlbertoOmnistructureEnvironmentturning page

In the lab there are lots of old posters with outdated autocad drawings, or printouts with schematics of old electronics hanging on the walls.

Can we get rid of those and start giving the lab a fresh and modern look?

  7949   Mon Jan 28 21:32:38 2013 jamieUpdateAlignmenttweaking of alignment into half PRC

[Koji, Jamie]

We tweaked up the alignment of the half PRC a bit.  Koji started by looking at the REFL and POP DC powers as a function of TT2 and PRM alignment. 
He found that the reflected beam for good PRC transmission was not well overlapped at REFL.  When the beam was well overlapped at REFL, there was clipping in the REFL path on the AS table.

We started by getting good overlap at REFL, and then went to the AS table to tweak up all the beams on the REFL pds and cameras.
This made the unlocked REFL DC about 40 count. This was about 10mV (=0.2mA) at the REFL55 PD.
This amazed Koji since we found the REFL DC (of the day) of 160 as the maximum of the day for a particular combination of the PRM Pitch and TT2 Pitch. So something wrong could be somewhere.

We then moved to the ITMX table where we cleaned up the POP path.  We noticed that the lens in the POP path is a little slow, so the beam is too big on the POP PD and on the POP camera (and on the camera pick-off mirror as well)
We moved the currently unused POP55 and POP22/110 RFPDs out of the way so we could move the POP RF PD and camera back closer to the focus.  Things are better, but we still need to get a better focus, particularly on the POP PD.

We found two irides on the oplev path. They are too big and one of these is too close to the POP beam. Since it does not make sense too to have two irides in vicinity, we pulled out that one from the post.

Other things we noticed:

  • The POP beam is definitely clipping in the vacuum, looks like on two sides.
  • We can probably get better layout on the POP table, so we're not hitting mirrors at oblique angles and can get beams on grid paths.

After the alignment work on the tables, we started locking the cavity. We already saw the improvement of the POPDC power from 1000 cnt to 2500 cnt without any realignment.
Once PRM is tweaked a little (0.01ish for pitch and yaw), the maximum POPDC of 6000 was achieved. But still the POP camera shows non-gaussian shape of the beam and the Faraday camera shows bright
scattering of the beam. It seems that the scattering at the Faraday is not from the main beam but the halo leaking from the cavity (i.e. unlocking of the cavity made the scattering disappeared)


Tomorrow Jenne and I will go into BS to tweak the alignment of the TEMP PRC flat mirror, and into ITMX to see if we can clean up the POP path.

  2707   Wed Mar 24 04:22:51 2010 kiwamu, mattUpdateGreen Lockingtwo NPRO PLL

Now some pedestals, mirrors and lenses are left on the PSL table, since we are on the middle way to construct a PLL setup which employs two NPROs instead of use of PSL laser.

So Please Don't steal any of them.

ELOG V3.1.3-