I tried to repeat Koji's PRMI lock using REFL165I/Q. I was not able to lock PRMI stably. All I could get was momentary PRMI sb locks (few seconds) using AS55Q for MICH and REFL165Q for PRMI. I tried to transition MICH locks from AS55Q to REFL165I/Q and this did not work well; I lost even the momentary locks.

The demod phases for both AS55 and REFL165 were also very different. 

Input ports:
AS55       WHTN: 21dB  demod phase -78.7deg
REFL165 WHTN: 45dB demod phase -80.7deg

Input matrix:
AS55Q x1.00 MICH

REL165Q x+0.14

Triggers:
MICH POP110I 100up/10down / FM Trig FM2/3/6/7/9 35up 2down 5sec delay
PRCL POP110I 100up/10down / FM Trig FM2/3/6/9 35up 2down 0.5sec delay

Servo:
MICH OFS 0.0 / Gain -10 / Limiter ON
PRCL OFS 0 / Gain -0.023 / Limiter ON

Output matrix:
MICH ITMX -1.0 / ITMY +1.0
PRCL PRM 1.0

[Koji Gautam]

We managed to realize stable ASS configuration for Yarm. The transmission of 1.06~1.07 was recovered by introducing intentional beam spot offset in the horizontal direction towards the opposite side of the elliptic reflector. The end table optics were adjusted to have the spots about the center of the mirrors, lenses, and PDs/QPDs.

Preparation

- The Y arm was manually aligned with a given input axis. The transmission was ~0.8.
- Then, TT2 was moved in yaw such that it introduced the horizontal beam shift at the end. By moving the spot to the opposite side of the reflector. The transmission ~0.95 was obtained after patient alignment work.

- Went to the end table and checked the spots. The beam was not at the center of the last 1" lens for the Trans PDs. The beam steering was adjusted to have the spot nicely going through the lens and the mirrors. This made the transmission level to be ~1.05.

- The beam centering on the Trans PD was checked and adjusted.
- The beam centering on the RF BBPD for the arm scan was checked. The spot was too big for that PD. The lens was slightly moved away from the PD to make the spot on the BBPD small. Now the PD saw the plateu when the steering was scanned (i.e. the spot is small enough).

- With the Y arm locked with MC2, the servo gain needs to be 0.012 instead of nominal 0.015 with ETMY to prevent from servo oscilating.

ASS tuning

- First of all, only the bottom 4 loops out of total 8 loops were tuned. They are the servos for the beam alignment with regard to the caivty. The linearity and the zero crossings were checked with regard to the reference alignment. All of these 4 showed offsets that causes the servo running away. Don't know the reason of this offset, but it is freq dependent. Therefore the dither freqs were tuned to make the offset zeroed, and tuned the demod phases there. This kept the transmission as high as the reference (~1.05)

- This allowed us to play with the spot position a bit by tuning the caivty alignment. In the end, the transmission of ~1.08 was obtained. Using this alignment, A2L offset for ETMY Yaw was determined to be +17 (to make the error signal -17). This offset produces almost a beam radius (5mm) shifted on the end mirror towards the opposite direction of the reflector.

- The nominal servo setting made the spot servo running away. Gautam pointed out that this could be a gain hierarchy problem (i.e. the spot servos are too fast). We ended up reducing the gain of the servo from 1.0 to 0.3 to make the spot servo stable.

- All the ASS setting was stored in a new snap file "script/ASS/ASS-DITEHR_ON.snap". The previous snap was saved to "script/ASS/ASS_DITHER_ON_preVent201807.snap". This did not save the exc gains of the oscillators. Therefore "DITHER_ASS_ON.py" was modified to have the new exc gains (CLKGAIN). The old values are stored in the comments in this script.

Overall this is not an ideal situation as we don't know what is the actually cause of the offsets in the dither error signals. We expect to correct the beam clipping and the suspension sooner or later. Therefore, we will come back to the ASS again once the other issues are corrected.

While attempting to execute the Python/Pylon code for the camera server, camera_server.py, the compiler couldn’t locate the pylon-5.0.5.so file. So I included the path for the required .so file as

export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$LD_LIBRARY_PATH:/opt/rtcds/Caltech/c1/scripts/GigE/pylon5/lib64

So with the file linked, the python program gets executed but then shows an error self.text= gst.elementfactory_make(“textoverlay”, “text0”)
gst.ElementNotFoundError: textoverlay 

The code reads- 

self.text= gst.elementfactory_make("textoverlay",text0")

Not sure what I am missing here. 

I think there might be a problem with the fact that the installation of the various components such as the .ini file and the Pylon software are in directories different from the ones Joe B. specifies in his paper. 

Instead of modifying the paths in the code itself, I tried creating the paths to match the code-

Update in /ligo directory 

/cds/caltech/c1/camera/L1-CAM-MC1.ini  created and then I ran the camera_server.py from scripts/GigE/SnapPy as

./camera_server.py -c /ligo/cds/caltech/c1/camera/L1-CAM-MC1.ini 

This prompted up the following on terminal- 

finished loading settings from /ligo/cds/caltech/c1/camera/L1-CAM-MC1.ini and lists the settings in the configuration file.

However the  gst.ElementNotFoundError: textoverlay still persists. 

Probably I could try putting all files in exactly the same directories as specified in the document. 

Right - we want to be compatible with new version of the code, so instead of moving the files to where the code wants them you should make symlinks. The symlinkks go in the place that the code wants and points back to the place where we have the files now.

For the textoverlay, you can just comment it out for now. We can add it back in later once we decide on how to label the video.

[Gautam, Jigyasa]

This evening, Gautam helped me resolve the error I had been encountering. I had been trying to run the code on Allegra and that threw up the gst.elementfactory_make(“textoverlay”, “text0”); gst.ElementNotFoundError: textoverlay error.
As an attempt to resolve the error, I had set up the paths to match those mentioned in the document.
However as it turns out, it wasn't really needed.

 When Gautam ran the code from Pianosa, the following error showed up
gst.elementfactory_make(“x264enc”, “ en ”);gst.ElementNotFoundError: x264.

We found that the x264 and x264enc are different entities.
Gautam then installed the Ubuntu- restricted-extras package with the following
gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad-multiverse
gstreamer0.10-plugins-ugly-multiverse

And eventually on compilation, the message ‘starting server’ was displayed on the screen. This was interrupted by another error GenICAM_3_0_Basler_pylon_v5_0::RuntimeException’

 So there is apparently a problem executing the commands on Allegra, because the camera server starts running on Donatella and Pianosa. 

I will now be looking into this newly encountered error and also be setting up the symlinks for the various paths in the code. 

I spent some time tonight trying to revive DRMI locking, with the arms held off on ALS. Not much news, I haven't been able to get more than a few short spurts of resonance, using 1F signals.

I did use SRY to measure the BS->SRCL coupling by exciting each mirror and looking at their relative coupling to AS55Q. I found that we should use a value of +0.28 +-0.01 in the MICH->SRM element.

[Anchal, Paco, Yehonathan]

Connected in-cir cable to new flange on ITMY Chamber

Connected OSEM one-by-one. Starting from top right  to left (PIn1)

1st connector: LL -> UR -> UL

2nd connector: LR -> SD

Loosening all OSEMs and taking them out and noting full bright readings:

• SD: 29564 -> 14787
• LR: 30902 -> 15451
• UR: 29280 -> 14640
• LL: 27690 -> 13845
• UL: 27668 -> 13834

:( We had to stop here as we were unable to actuate on the side coils. We checked the signal chain and found that the monitor output of AS1 LL/SD coil driver is responding to offset changes in the coil output filter module of AS1 side. However, when we connected the output of the coil driver through a breakout board to the AS1 Sat Amp, we saw no signal. We tried switching the coil driver bo with another one one the rack but we found the exact same issue. This led us to believe that something must be wrong with the AS1 Sat Amp. We checked the output of the AS1 LL/SD coil driver without connecting it to the sat amp and found that the output was responding to our CDS changes. Then we checked the second "Coil Input" port of the AS1 Sat Amp, and found that pins 2-7 and pins 3-8 are shorted. This means channel 5 and 8 on this box would be shorted. This is the reason why we were unable to actuate on the coils. I'll work on debugging this box, my first guess is that the ribbon cable is bad.

Attempted Battery Replacement on Backup Power Supply in the Control Room:

I tried to replace the batteries in the Smart UPS 2200 with new batteries purchased by Steve.  However, the power port wasn't compatible with the batteries.  The battery cable's plug was too tall to fit properly into the Smart UPS port.  New batteries must be acquired.  Steve has pictures of the original battery (gray) and the new battery (blue) plugs, which look quite different (even though the company said the battery would fit).

The Correct battery connector is GRAY : APC RBC55

This afternoon we attempted to lock the interferometer using Megatron insteady of the usual ETMY front end.

We attempted it once, found the alignment seemed particularly bad, then realized we had forgotten to add the QPDs.  In the process of adding the QPDs to the tst.mdl file, we realized I (Joe) should have been looking at the iscNetDsc.h file, not the iscNetDs40m.h file for the RFM memory structure.  The only major difference was the memory location of where the qpd information gets passed.

We added QPDs to the tst.mdl file, writing to the RFM network with the QPD pitch, yaw and sum values.

We also added normalization to the oplev, by dividing the OL pitch and yaw values by the OL sum value in the tst.mdl file.

The lscPos, ascPit, ascYaw were working properly, although we did have to poke at the ascPit and ascYaw values once before they started reading properly at Megatron (they started at -1e20).  We think the RFM card may have started in an odd state, and without something causing the ascPit and ascYaw values to change, it never updated.

At the end of the day, the interferometer was locked for a few seconds.  There is are still some issues to be worked on, but its progress.

Koji returned everything back to normal operations after the test.

Using /ligo/apps/linux-x86-64/camera/bin/camera_client.py -c  /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/GigE/SnapPy/L1-CAM-MC1.ini, the Python script was able to run without error but didn't show any video feed from the camera in GStreamer. Problem might be in the configuration of the camera in the .ini file.
 

You'll likely have to run camera_server.py using the same ini file first before you can use the client. Since the pylon installation is not on the shared drive but only local to optimus at the moment you would have to do it from there. You'll need to add /opt/pylon5/lib64/ to LD_LIBRARY_PATH or it won't find some required libraries. I couldn't start up the server all the way, probably because we need to define some slow EPICS channels before running the server script, as Joe points out in his document T1300202. You'll find instructions how to do that for example in this elog.

We ought to put the camera software on the shared disk; I don't think there's any speed reasons that it needs to be local.

Its OK to use optimus as the camera server for testing at the moment, but once we have things running, we'll install a few more cameras. With ~4-5 GigE running, we may not want to share with optimus, since we're also using it for comsol and skymap calculations.

[Jenne, Sanjit]

As per Matt's instructions in his OAF document (elog 395) in the Tuning section, Sanjit and I took a transfer function measurement from the output of the OAF system, to the input.  i.e. we're trying to measure what happens out in the real world when we push on MC1, and how that is fed back to the input of our filter as MC_L.  The game plan is to measure this transfer function, and read off the phase at the nyquist frequency, and use this value to calculate the appropriate sample-and-hold delay to be used in the OAF.  The downsample rate for the OAF is 32, so that we're running at 64Hz instead of the 2048Hz of the front-end.  Thus, our Nyquist frequency is 32Hz.

                            DownSampleRate

Phase@Nyquist * ------------------------

                                    180

In the attached figure we do a swept sine from CORR_EXC to ERR_EMPH_OUT to determine the transfer function.  Here, we turn off all of the filters in both the CORR and EXC banks, because those are already matched/taken into account in the PEM filter banks. 

Using the cursor on DTT, we find that the phase at 29.85Hz is -228.8deg, and at 37.06Hz is -246.0deg.  Extrapolating, this means that at 32Hz, we expect about -234deg phase.  Using our handy-dandy formula, this means that we should try a delay of 41 or 42 (41.6 is between these two...) 

We'll give this a shot!

 As Rana pointed out to me last night, I was using continuous phase, which is not good.  When using regular phase, I find: (29.85Hz, 131.216deg), (37.06Hz, 113.963deg), so extrapolating gives (32Hz, 126.07deg).  Plugging this in to our handy-dandy formula, we get a delay of 22.4, so we should try both 22 and 23.

 Here's a plot of the spectra of the seismometers and MCL. The coherence shows which axes are aligned right now: MC1_X is coherent with GUR_NS which means that its mis-oriented.

I've now swapped the "MC1" cables: so the old "NS" now goes into EW and the old EW now goes into NS. VERT is unchanged.

Also fixed the channel names - the Guralp previously named MC1 is now GUR1 and the other one is GUR2. Also no more EW, NS, & VERT. Its all XYZ.

DAQD restarted with the new channel names.

I remeasured the OAF time delay using the OAF-TF template from the Templates/ directory.

Troublingly, I found the MC1 dewhitening switches set OFF - please make sure that the MC1 dewhitening is back ON after each OAF tuning so that the interferometer locking is not hosed.

The OAF-TF template had the excitation amplitude set ~20x too high. I reduced it and the coherence was still > 0.95. The phase at 32 Hz was still ~126 deg as Jenne had measured, but since the phase at DC is 180 deg, the overall phase lag is just 180-126 = 54 deg. So the delay should be 54/180 * 32 = 9.7 => 10. Luckily, Jenne is working on an instructional manual for OAF that will make all of this crystal clear.

[Yuta, Mayank]

UPDATE: It turned out that the pair of 0.3 OD ND filters we used were not matched. So we replaced them with new 0.5 OD NENIR05A-C from thorlabs. Now both the photodiodes give similar count.

The DC power incident on the PDs is 74 mW which may cause saturation. We attenuated the beam going to BHD_DC Photodiodes using ND filter of OD 0.3 which gives attenuation of 0.5. 

[Yuta, Paco]

We attenuated RFPD BHD paths to prevent saturation

To prevent saturating RPFDs, we added ND filters along BH44 and BH55 paths. We calculated the optimal filters to be used by taking into account the previously measured DC levels at both RFPDs as well as their DC transimpedances.

BH55 (S/N 117, former POP55) DC transimpedance is reported to be 10010 V/A. Assuming a responsivity of 0.8 A/V, we expect 8008 V/W at DC. When PRMI is locked, we have measured 10 mW of light incident on this PD such that it gets saturated. Then we installed an OD ~ 1 filter to drop the power to 1 mW such that at most we get 8 VDC (< 15 VDC rail).

BH44 (S/N 115, former unknown) DC transimpedance is estimated to be 645 V/A. Assuming 0.8 A/V, we expect 516 V/W at DC. This RFPD gets 27 mW when PRMI is locked, giving a slightly saturated PD> Then we installed an OD ~ 0.5 filter to drop the power to ~ 8 mW such that we at most get 4 VDC (< 15 VDC rail).

The laser power was attenuated to 40 mW yesterday for ensuring that the power built up within the MC does not damage the optics. 

This however stopped us from the doubling work and besides also reduced the power available for locking the PMC. 

Therefore, today the laser attenuation was removed and once again 500mW is available at the exit of the PMC .  

However the power sent to the MC has been reduced to 60mW by changing one of the mirrors in the zig-zag to a 33% beam splitter.  Though about 450mW is incident on the beam splitter the reflected beam is only about 55mW since the mirror reflectance is specified for P polarised light incident at 45deg while ours is S-polarised incident at less than 45deg.   The light transmitted through the beam splitter has been blocked by a beam dump.

I hooked up the ALSX DFD output to the fibox, and used the adjustable delay line to set the phase properly. I recorded the noise on pianosa, and have attached it. Of course, this doesn't really capture the low frequency behavior. 

Unrelated to this: I found the MC WFS turned off, and the loops ran away when turning them on. I tweaked the alignment, and reset the WFS offsets. Seems stable for now. 

I pressed the Auto-Z(ero) button for ~ 3 seconds at ~9:55 local (pacific) time on the trillium interface on 1X5.

This nicely brought the sensing signal back to ~zero. See attachment

Some basic info:

• BS Seismometer is T240 (Trillium)
• The interface unit is at 1X5 Slot 26. D1002694
• aLIGO Trillium 240 Interface Quick Start Guide T1000742

thanks, this seems to have recentered well.

It looks like it started to act funny at 0400 UTC on 10/24, so thats 9 PM on Sunday in the 40m. What was happening then?

We talked about the thing that watches the scripts for autolocking during the meeting today.

I've resurrected the Perl-Tk GUI that we used through i/eLIGO for watching the IFO and running the appropriate scripts. This is not meant to be a replacement for aLIGO stuff, but just something to get us going for now. I expect that we will make some new fanciness which will eclipse this, but I brought it back so that we don't start off with some 'Advanced' system which is worse than the old one.

You can run it from scripts/c1/ by typing ./AutoRUN.pl. It pops up the GUI and starts in a Disabled mode where it watches and does nothing.

I have done some editing of the GUI's code so that it uses caget / caput instead of ezca binaries. New stuff is in the SVN.

Next up is to start testing it and fixing it up so that it uses the thresholds set in the LSC screens rather than some hardcoded values.

Eventually we should also convert all of its daughter scripts from tcsh to bash to keep Jamie's blood pressure in the low hundreds...

[Gautam, Johannes]

The autolocker was acting up today, Gautam traced it to EPICS channels ( namely C1:IOO-MC_LOCK_ENABLE and C1:IOO-MC_AUTOLOCK_BEAT ) served by c1iool0 not being responsive and keyed the crate. This restored it nominal operation.

 This post describes how to use the Automated Photodetector Frequency Response System.

On the mechanical side, turn on:

-the diode laser (in rack 1Y1)

-the RF Switch (in rack 1Y1)

-the reference PD (under the POY table)

-the AG4395A Network Analyzer

The NA’s RF output should go to the laser’s modulation input, the reference PD’s output should go to the NA’s R input, and the RF Switch Chassis’s output (which is the combination of the two switches’ COM channels using a splitter) should go to the NA’s A input.

Once this is done, navigate into /users/alex.cole and run PDFR.sh. This script collects data for each photodetector under consideration by switching using a python script and communicating with the NA via GPIB. It then sends all the data to RF.m, which fits the functions, plots the latest data against canonical data, and saves the plots to file.

The fitting function, fit.m, also outputs peak frequency to the command line. This function uses PD name data (e.g. ‘REFL33’) to choose an interval with minimal noise to fit.

The main script prompts the user to press enter after each NA sweep to make sure that measurements don’t get interrupted/put out of order by RF switching.

Once you're done, you should turn off the laser, NA, RF Switch, and reference PD.

Troubleshooting

Sometimes, the NA throws up and doesn’t feel like running a particular sweep. If this happens, it’s a good idea to keep the matlab script from trying to analyze this PD’s data. Do this by opening up RF.m and commenting out the calls to ‘fit’ and ‘canonical’ for that PD.

If fit.m complains about a particular set of data, it is often the case that the N/P ratio (where N is order of approximation and P is number of points in the interval) is too high. You can fix this by reducing N or making the PD’s frequency range (chosen in the fnew_idx line) larger.

Choosing a single PD

If you only want to grab the transfer function for one PD, first look up which switch input it belongs to. This information is contained in /users/alex.cole/switchList. To turn the switch to a particular input, type something like:

python rf.py “ch7”

This command uses TCP/IP to tell the switch to look at channel 7. Switch input numbers range from 1 to 16, though not all of them are in use.

Once the switch is looking at the correct input, you can run a sweep and download the data by typing /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/general/netgpibdata/NWAG4395A -s 1000000 -e 500000000 -c 499000000 -f [filestem for output] -d [path of directory for output] -i 192.168.113.108 -g 10 -x 15. 

Summary

In anticipation of needing to test hundreds of suspension signals after the c1susaux upgrade, I've started developing a Python package to automate these tests: susPython

https://git.ligo.org/40m/suspython

The core of this package is not any particular test, but a general framework within which any scripted test can be "nested." Built into this framework is extensive signal trapping and exception handling, allowing actuation tests to be performed safely. Namely it protects against crashes of the test scripts that would otherwise leave the suspensions in an arbitrary state (e.g., might destroy alignment).

Usage

The package is designed to be used as a standalone from the command line. From within the root directory, it is executed with a single positional argument specifying the suspension to test:

Currently the package requires Python 2 due to its dependence on the cdsutils package, which does not yet exist for Python 3.

Scripted Tests

So far I've implemented a cross-consistency test between the DC-bias outputs to the coils and the shadow sensor readbacks. The suspension is actuated in pitch, then in yaw, and the changes in PDMon signals are measured. The expected sign of the change in each coil's PDMon is inferred from the output filter matrix coefficients. I believe this test is sensitive to two types of signal-routing errors: no change in PDMon response (actuator is not connected), incorrect sign in either pitch or yaw response, or in both (two actuators are cross-wired).

The next test I plan to implement is a test of the slow system using the fast system. My idea is to inject a 3-8 Hz excitation into the coil output filter modules (either bandlimited noise or a sine wave), with all coil outputs initially disabled. One coil at a time will be enabled and the change in all VMon signals monitored, to verify the correct coil readback senses the excitation. In this way, a signal injected from the independent and unchanged fast system provides an absolute reference for the slow system.

I'm also aware of ideas for more advanced tests, which go beyond testing the basic signal routing. These too can be added over time within the susPython framework.

if this gonna be general for everybody, maybe it oughta be called IFOtest (like the last incarnation that was tried in Livingston) ?

then the SUS tests could just be some smaller set of measurements. Using the same code base, but different params.

I suspect that the LD of the aux laser is dying.
- The max power we obtain from this laser (700mW NPRO) is 33mW. Yes, 33mW. (See attachment 1)
- The intensity noise is likely to be relaxation oscillation and the frequency is so low as the pump power is low. When the ADJ is adjusted to 0, the peak moved even lower. (Attachment 2, compare purple and red)
- What the NE (noise eater) doing? Almost nothing. I suspect the ISS gain is too low because of the low output power. (Attachment 2, compare green and red)

In September 2017 I measured ~150mW output power, which was already kind of low. What are the chances of getting this one repaired? Steve, can you please check the serial number? It's probably too old like the other ones.

We took an OLG measurement of the green PDH loop. It seems consistent with past measurements. I've added a trace for the the post-mixer lowpass, to show its contribution to the phase loss. (EDIT: updated with measured LPF TF)

I used this measured OLG and the datasheet laser PZT conversion factor to calibrate the control signal monitor into the AUX laser frequency noise, it looks consistent with the frequency noise measured via the PSL PLL (300 Hz/rtHz @ 100Hz). Above a few tens of kHz, the control signal measurement is all analyzer noise floor, due to the fourth order 70kHz lowpass after the mixer (the peaks change height significantly depending on the analyzer input range, so I don't think they're on the laser). Gautam will follow up with more detailed measurements of both the error and control signals as he noisebudgets, this was just intended as a quick consistency check.

We want to measure the g-factor of the PRC using the beat note of the main laser with an auxiliary NPRO laser.

We are going to phase lock the NPRO to the main laser (taking it from POY) and then we will inject the NPRO  through the AS edge of the ITMY.

Today Sendhil and I installed the auxiliary laser on the ITMY table moving it from the AS table.

We also installed the beam steering optics, except the BS which will launch the beam through the AR edge of the ITMY.

To do: install the BS, take the POY beam and mix it with the auxiliary laser on a photodiode to phase lock the two lasers, do better calculations for the mode matching optics to be used for the auxiliary laser beam.

 I moved the auxiliary laser from the ITMY table to the PSL table and installed all the optics (mirrors and lenses) to steer the beam up to a PDA55 photodiode, where also the pick-off of the PSL is sent.

Tomorrow I'm going to measure the beat note between the two.

The Incredible Melting Man!

I fixed a shaker that was claimed to be broken. I had to cut the rubber membrane to open the head.

Once it was opened, the cause of the trouble was obvious. The soldering joint could not put up with the motion of the head.

It is interesting to see that the spring has the damping layer between the metal sheets.

After the repair the DC resistance was measured. It was 1.9Ohm. The side of the shaker chassis said "3.5Ohm, Max 15VA". So it can take more than 4A (wow).

I gave 2A DC from the bench top supply and turn the current on and off. I could confirm the head was moving.

I'll claim the use of this shaker for the seismometer development.

My SURF week-1 work...

Motivation:

To measure the transimpedence of  the Broadband photodiode (D1002969-v8), using a New focus photodiode (1611) as reference. The amplitude modulated Jenne Laser (1.2mW) was used. 

The steps involved in getting the transimpedence are as follows:

Acquiring data

• Get 2 sets of data from Network Analyzer Agilent 4395: One set of data will be for the transfer function of Ref PD over RF out. The other set for Test PD over Ref PD.
• The following conditions were set:

1) Frequency sweep range: 1MHz to 200 MHz.

2) Number of Points sampled in  the range: 201

3) Type of sweep: Logarithmic

• Set the NA to give the corresponding transfer function values in dB and also Phase response in degrees.
• Save the data into floppy disk for processing on the computer (The wireless way of acquiring data was not working when the experiment was conducted )

Plotting

• The matlab code attached (TransimpedencePlot.m) will then give plots for the absolute values of transimpedence in V/A.
• Logic involved in the code:
  • Transimpedence = Voltage response / (Responsivity of the photodiode * Power incident) 
  • Responsivity for BBPD is taken as 0.1 A/W and for NF1611 as 0.68 A/W as given in their datasheets.
  • Voltage response of Test PD w.r.t RF output of NA (in dB) = Voltage response of Test PD w.r.t Ref PD (in dB) + Voltage response of Ref PD w.r.t RF output of NA (in dB) 

 Results

The Plots of transimpedence obtained are attached (results.pdf) . The results obtained for BBPD is consistent with the ones obtained before, but the same method and code gives a different transimpedence for 1611.

The transimpedence of NF 1611 was obtained to be around 4-5 V/A which is very much off-track compared to the one given in the datasheet (elog: 2906).

The transimpedence of  Broadband photodiode (D1002969-v8) was around 1200 - 1300 V/A for most of the range, but the value started falling as the frequency approached 100 MHz. This result is consistent with DCC document: T1100467-v2.

How is the modulation depth assumed in the calculation?

If you don't know the modulation depth, you can't calibrate the transimpedance of each PD individually.

 Motivation:

To measure the transimpedence of  the Broadband photodiode (D1002969-v8), using a New focus photodiode (1611) as reference. The amplitude modulated Jenne Laser (1.2mW) was used @20mA

The steps involved in getting the transimpedence:

Acquiring data

• The following conditions were set on Network Analyzer Agilent 4395:

1) Frequency sweep range: 500KHz to 300 MHz.

2) Number of Points sampled in  the range: 301

3) Type of sweep: Logarithmic

• Set the NA to give the corresponding transfer function value (output of BBPD over output of 1611) and also Phase response in degrees.
• Save the data into floppy disk for processing on the computer.

Plotting

• The matlab code attached (Trans_plot.m) will then give plots for the absolute values of transimpedence in V/A.
• Logic involved in the code will be presented clearly in a separate Elog. 

 Results

The Plots of transimpedence obtained are attached. The data and matlab code used is in the zip file.

The transimpedence of  Broadband photodiode (D1002969-v8) was around 1200 - 1300 V/A for most of the range (2), but the value started falling as the frequency approached 200 MHz. 

Sorry for the late update Koji.

There was a bug in my code that was pointed out by koji and here is the revised plot of transimpedence. The correct code attached.

The transimpedence value is unusually high, about 50kV/A-70kV/A for most of the range. The same was observed when the transimpedence was calculated on another BBPD in Elog.

It is highly unlikely that both the BBPDs are faulty and might be because I am doing the calculations wrong. Must dig deeper into this. Maybe it is a good idea to try the shot noise method of calculating the transimpedence and see how the values turn out. Will do that ASAP.

This BBPD is the spare that we pulled out and is installed for ALSX-PSL beat note detection.

[JC, Paco, Anchal, Yuta]

- We installed the new BH44 beam path and RFPD.

- JC installed the new beam path for the LO/AS camera.

- We succeeded in locking LO Phase with BH44_Q_ERR, but didn't attempt FPMI BH44 because we noted large 60 Hz harmonics in most of our RF error signals.

BH44 RPFD/Camera installation:

- We picked off LO/AS beam path previously going to the camera, and installed a Y1 (45 deg, s-pol) mirror, a f=150mm lens and the RFPD (Attachment #1). We initially tested it using the incandescent light from a flashlight and then aligned the beam, we also made sure it's not saturating.

- Using the spurious transmission from the mirror mentioned above, we steered a new beam path for the camera and realigned it using another short focal length lens (f ~ 100 mm).

LO Phase control:

- We increased the whitening gain from 0 dB to 42 dB for both C1:LSC-BH44_I and C1:LSC-BH44_Q, and zeroed the offsets. Even before this step we could see a fringe from BH44, which is quite promising!

- After alignment was recovered on the LO/AS path, we succeeded in locking the single bounce (ITMX) LO phase using BH44_Q. Here the configuration was FM4, FM5 and a gain of ~ 5 * 0.5 = 2.5 (to match the typical BH55_Q error point).

- While BH44_Q was used to control the LO phase, we saw the BH55_Q was not zero but actually almost at max fringe value (see Attachment #2). This implies the BH44_Q is indeed orthogonal to BH55_Q with respect to the LO Phase!

FPMI lock:

- We locked electronic FPMI but noted a  large 60 Hz + harmonics component in the RF error signals including AS55, BH55, REFL55, and BH44 (see Attachment #3). We could hand off to FPMI and even locked the LO phase with BH44_Q, but we were not sure the BHD_DIFF error signal was fit for handoff to FPMI BHD. Therefore we stopped here.

60 Hz + harmonics:

- We did a quick investigation around the areas we have been working in the lab to see if we had introduced this noise in any obvious way. First we checked the new amplifier for the 44 MHz LO, we briefly removed its power but the 60 Hz noise remained. Then we checked the AP table, but nothing had really changed there. We also disconnected and removed the rolling cart with the marconi and other instruments from the LSC rack. Finally, we turned all the lights down. None of these quick fixes changed the amount of noise.

- We also tried looking at these error signals under different IFO alignment and feedback configurations. We always see the noise in the AS55 and REFL55 quadratures, but not in BH44, BH55 or BHD_DIFF unless MICH is locked.

Next steps:

- Investigate more into 60 Hz noise, why? where?

- Measure sensing matrix with LO Phase locked with BH44 and BH55 to make comparison.

- FPMI-BH44

Here's the beam path of BH44.

We lowered the BH44 and BH55 DC transimpedances to ~ 50 V/A

[Paco, Yuta]

Background

When locking the homodyne phase angle using BH44_Q or BH55_Q error signals, we notice the orthogonal quadrature (BH44_I, BH55_I) sometimes appears too noisy. The origin of this useless signal is not known, but we have recently attenuated these beams by placing ND filters before the two RFPDs to avoid saturation effects which become obvious when we lock PRMI. We decided to investigate further by the following tests:

• Remove ND filters and lower the DC transimpedances to ~ 50 V/A
• Check for scattering from suspended optics, e.g. by injecting a line at ITM PIT/YAW and look at the BH44/BH55 demodulated spectra
• Check for PRCL sensing by BH44/BH55, e.g. by measuring the transfer function and/or running a simulation in finesse.
• Check the RF spectra for the signals entering the IQ demod boards (including the 44 and 55 MHz LOs).

DC transimpedance modifications

The first thing we did was change the DC transimpedances of both RFPDs. After removing them from the table, we checked the schematics for 40m RFPDs on the wiki. The DC transimpedance for these gold RFPDs (D980454-v1-C) is estimated as (R22*(1+R13/R23), where these resistors are located around the follower and non-inverting amplifier stages along the DC output traces. After opening the two RFPDs and taking photos of the circuits before any changes (Attachment #1-2), we estimated the DC transimpedances from the measured values for R22, R23 and R13 and summarized them below:

The changes were made on R13 (photos in Attachments #2-3) and the final values summarized below:

All changes have been summarized and recorded in the wiki. The ND filters were set to 0.04 (minimum attenuation) and RFPDs reinstalled.

Next steps:

Continue investigating these items:

• Remove ND filters and lower the DC transimpedances to ~ 50 V/A
• Check for scattering from suspended optics, e.g. by injecting a line at ITM PIT/YAW and look at the BH44/BH55 demodulated spectra
• Check for PRCL sensing by BH44/BH55, e.g. by measuring the transfer function and/or running a simulation in finesse.
• Check the RF spectra for the signals entering the IQ demod boards (including the 44 and 55 MHz LOs).

[Anchal, Paco, JC, Yuta]

We have started hardware installations for BH44 RF PD. 44 MHz LO generation and signal chain from IQ demodulator was checked successfully, but found that IQ demodulator is not orthogonal.

RF PD Interface:
 - We have unplugged Ch2 of the RFPD Interface (labeled "Special") to re-use it for BH44. Ch2 was used for "UNIDENTIFIED" RFPD. DB15 cable was routed to ITMY table and connected to BH44 RF PD (40m/17398) now sitting on the cover of ITMY table. See Attachment #1.
 - Finding a DB15 RF PD interface cable was easy because of the organization work!

44 MHz LO generation:
 - LO for BH44 was generate following the scheme proposed in 40m/17319.
 - 11 MHz LO from RF distributor labeled "+16 dBm" (measured to be 16.5 dBm) and 55 MHz LO labeled "SPARE 55" (measured to be 2.26 dBm) was mixed with a mixer ZFM-1H-S+ (using 11 MHz as LO, and 55 MHz highpass filtered with SHP-50+ as RF). The mixer output was lowpass filtered with SLP-50+, and amplified with ZFL-500LN+, which gave 8.07 dBm at 44 MHz. The second heighest peak was -11.53 dBm at 22 MHz, which seems low enough. See Attachment #2 for the photo of the setup.

IQ demodulation:
 - We have used unused IQ demodulator labeled "AS165" to use it for BH44. See Attachment #3.
 - We have quickly checked if the IQ demodulator is working or not with LO from BH55, PD input of 55 MHz generated using Moku to see I and Q outputs. The outputs are sine waves at frequency consistent with the difference between LO frequency and "PD input" frequency, and the phase was off as expected. Q output was ~4 dBm higher than I output.

Measured diff of BH44:
 - After CDS modifications where done, BH44 IQ demodulator was tested by using 44 MHz LO generated in a method mentioned above, and injecting 11.066195 * 4 MHz signal from Moku as PD input. This gave ~75 Hz signal in C1:LSC-BH44_I and C1:LSC-BH44_Q.
 - With 0dB whitening gain and whitening/unwhitening filters off, gain imbalance was measured to be Q/I=137.04/62.49=2.19, and measured phase difference to be PHASE_D=27.21 deg (see Attachment #4; gpstime=1358051213).
 - With 0dB whitening gain and whitening/unwhitening filters on, gain imbalance was measured to be Q/I=138.44/63.21=2.19, and measured phase difference to be PHASE_D=26.95 deg (see Attachment #5; gpstime=1358051325138). This is consistent with whitening/unwhitening off, and noise is smaller, which mean whitening/unwhitening filters are probably working fine.
 - IQ demodulator board might be not working properly, as I and Q signals are not quite orthogonal.

Model changes:

• We modified c1lsc, c1hpc and c1cal model for BH44.
• BH44 ADC pins were identified and connected for RFPD phase rotator.
• The signals are sent to c1hpc through IPC where BH44 is now available for feedback loops in single and dual demodulation.
• The whitening filter controls and anti-aliasing filter enable buttons were created in c1iscaux slow machine db files.
• MEDM screens are updated accordingly (see Attachment #6).

Next:
  - Use different IQ demodulator board that has better IQ orthogonality.
  - Connect BH44 RF PD and use 44 MHz test input to check the signal chain.
  - Install BH44 RF PD optical path.
  - Try locking LO_PHASE with BH44.

I checked the LSC rack to evaluate what we might need to generate 44 MHz rf in the hypothetical case we go from BH55 to BH44 (a.k.a. double RF demod scheme). There is an 11 MHz LO port labeled +16 dBm (measured 9 Vpp ~ 23 dBm actually) on the left hand side. Furthermore, there is an unused 55 MHz port labeled "Spare 55 LO". I checked this output to be 1.67 Vpp ~ +8.4 dBm. Anyways the 55 MHz doesn't look very nice; after checking it on the spectrum analyzer it seems like lower frequency peaks are polluting it so it may be worth checking the BH55 LO (labeled REFL 55) signal to see if it's better. Anyways we seem to have the two minimum LOs needed to synthesize 44 MHz in case we move forward with BH44.

[Paco, Yuta]

We confirmed the noisy 55 MHz is shared between AS55, BH55 and any other 55 MHz LOs. Looking more closely at the spectrum we saw the most prominent peaks at 11.06 MHz and 29.5 MHz (IMC and PMC nominal PM freqs). This 55 MHz LO is coming all the way from the RF distribution box near the IOO rack. According to this diagram, this 55 MHz LO should have gone through a bandpass filter; interestingly, checking the RF generation box spare 55 MHz the output is *cleaner* and displays ~ 17 dBm level... ??? Will continue investigating when we actually need this RF.