40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 330 of 337  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Categorydown Subject
  2338   Wed Nov 25 20:24:49 2009 AlbertoUpdateABSLPLL Open Loop Gain Measured

I measured the open loop gain of the PLL in the AbsL experiment.

I repeated the measurement twice: one with gain knob on the universal PDH box g=3.0; the second measurement with g=6.0

The UGF were 60 KHz and 100 KHz, respectively.

That means that one turn of the knob equals to about +10 dB.

Attachment 1: 2009-09-25_OLgain_g3png.png
2009-09-25_OLgain_g3png.png
Attachment 2: 2009-09-25_OLgain_g6png.png
2009-09-25_OLgain_g6png.png
  2339   Wed Nov 25 20:28:17 2009 AlbertoUpdateABSLStopped working on the AbsL

I closed the shutter of the NPRO for the night.

  2342   Fri Nov 27 02:25:26 2009 ranaUpdateABSLPLL Open Loop Gain Measured

Quote:

I measured the open loop gain of the PLL in the AbsL experiment.

 Plots don't really make sense. The second one is inherently unstable - and what's g?

  2420   Tue Dec 15 21:39:34 2009 AlbertoUpdateABSLbrief summary of this afternoon's measurements
I took measurements of the open loop gain of the AbsL PLL with the old Universal PDH Box.
I Also measured the filter shape of both the new and the old PDH box.
I'm going to plot the results in a nice form tomorrow morning.
For who's interested, the PLL UGF was at 10KHz.
 
I can't lock the PLL with the new PDH box. Measuring its filter's shape, as suggested by Koji, I found out that it differs from the old one. That despite the fact that the two boxes should share the same circuit schematic. O,r at least, that is what it looks like from the schematics in the DCC.
I need to understand whether that is intentional and, if that was the case, what kind of use  Rich Abbott designed it for.
 
Tomorrow I'm going to post in the elog the filter's transfer functions too.
 
Before leaving the lab I closed the auxiliary laser's mechanical shutter.
  2421   Wed Dec 16 11:21:20 2009 AlbertoUpdateABSLUniversal PDH Box Servo Filters
Yesterday I measured the shape of the servo filter of both the old and the new Universal PDH boxes.
Here they are compared.

NewandOlfFilterTF.png

The way the filter's transfer function has been measured is by a swept sine between the "SERVO INPUT" and the "PIEZO DRIVE OUTPUT" connection on the box front panel. The spectrum analyzer used for the measurement is the SR785 and the source amplitude is set at 0.1V.

The two transfer functions are clearly different. In particular the old one looks like a simple integrator, whereas the new one already includes some sort of boost.

That probably explains why the new one is unable to lock the PLL. Indeed what the PLL needs, at least to acquire lock, is an 1/f filter.

I thought the two boxes were almost identical, at least in the filter shapes. Also the two schematics available in the DCC coincide.

Attachment 1: NewandOlfFilterTF.png
NewandOlfFilterTF.png
  2422   Wed Dec 16 11:46:25 2009 AlbertoUpdateABSLAbsl PLL Open Loop Gain

Yesterday I measured the Open Loop Gain of the PLL in the absolute length experiment. The servo I used was that of the old Universal PDH box.

The OLG looks like this:

OldBoxOLTF.png

The UGF is at 10 KHz.

  2423   Wed Dec 16 11:55:47 2009 ranaUpdateABSLUniversal PDH Box Servo Filters

 

 To me, they both look stable. I guess that the phase has to go to -180 deg to be unstable.

Why does the magnitude go flat at high frequencies? That doesn't seem like 1/f.

How about a diagram of what inputs and outputs are being measured and what the gain knob and boost switch settings are?

  2460   Mon Dec 28 15:34:14 2009 AlbertoUpdateABSLWorking on the AP table

I opened the auxiliary laser's shutter.

I'm currently working on the AP table.

  2461   Mon Dec 28 18:35:27 2009 AlbertoUpdateABSLWorking on the AP table

Quote:

I opened the auxiliary laser's shutter.

I'm currently working on the AP table.

 I finished working on the table.

I closed the AUX NPRO's shutter.

  2493   Sat Jan 9 15:02:01 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLPRC scanning
I scanned the PRC in the frequency range of 30-60 MHz, untill the PLL lost lock. But everything is working fine.
The PRC remained lock for all time, with SPOB at ~1000.
I'm leaving the lab now, planning to come back tomorrow.
I turned the flipping mirrors down and closed the mechanical shutter of the auxiliary NPRO.
  2502   Mon Jan 11 11:06:53 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLMeasurement running

Quote:

I'm working on the AbsL experiment. A measurement which involved the PRC locked is running at the moment.

Please make sure of not interfering with the interferometer until it is done. Thank you.

 I'm done for the moement.

I realized that I need to take into account somehow the DC power from the photodiode. By now the measurement of the transmitted beat's power is affected by the total power circulating inside of the PRC and thus it depends on the cavity alignment.

I closed the laser shutter and turned down the flipping mirrors.

I'm planning to restart measuring by 2.30pm today. Till then the interferometer is available.

  2504   Mon Jan 11 16:59:14 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLInterferometer Busy

I'm currently running a measurement on the PRC.

Please don't interfere with the IFO until it is done. Talk with Alberto if you've been intending to work inside the lab.

Thank you.

  2505   Mon Jan 11 19:36:13 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLMeasurement running

Leaving for dinner. Back in ~1hr.

I left a measurement running. Please don't interfere with it till I'm back. Thanks.

  2506   Mon Jan 11 21:49:17 2010 JenneUpdateABSLMeasurement running

Quote:

Leaving for dinner. Back in ~1hr.

I left a measurement running. Please don't interfere with it till I'm back. Thanks.

 Per Alberto's instructions, I have closed the shutter on his laser so that the Adaptive Team can play with the Mode Cleaner.

  2508   Tue Jan 12 09:37:05 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLIFO available

I finished measuring the AbsL for this morning. The IFO is again available.

Please don't mess up with the interferometer though. I'll be back in a couple of ours

  2513   Wed Jan 13 12:03:00 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLMeasurement now running. Please be careful

At the moment I'm running a measurement on the PRC and I'm planning to leave it going for the time we'll be at the 40m meeting.

Please be careful in the lab. Thank you.

  2521   Mon Jan 18 18:34:01 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLMeasurement in progress

I started a long measurement of the PRC's transmissivity. I'm leaving the lab and I'm going to be back at about 8 tonight. Please do not disturb the interferometer. it is important that the MC and the PRC stay locked all the time.

  2522   Mon Jan 18 20:58:40 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLMeasurement in progress

Quote:

I started a long measurement of the PRC's transmissivity. I'm leaving the lab and I'm going to be back at about 8 tonight. Please do not disturb the interferometer. it is important that the MC and the PRC stay locked all the time.

 That measurement is finished. I'm now going to start another one that will take another hour or so. I'm leaving it running for the night. If you want to work on the IFO, it should be definitely done by 11pm.

  2531   Tue Jan 19 12:54:39 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLMeasurement in progress

A measurement will be running for the next hour. Please be careful.

  2532   Tue Jan 19 16:21:18 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLWatchdogs not working and then fixed

This afternoon the watchdogs stopped working: they didn't trip when the suspension positions crossed the threshold values.

I rebooted c1susaux (aka c1dscl1epics0 in the 1Y5 rack), which is the computer that runs the watchdog processes.

The reboot fixed the problem.

  2534   Wed Jan 20 20:11:56 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLSome preliminary results from measuring PRC's transmissivity for an amplitude modulated beam
Here I'm posting a plot showing a set of measurements that I made in the past few days to determine the absolute length of the PRC cavity.
As in my other AbsL measurements, I inject an auxiliary laser beam into the cavity and look at the transmission. In the PRC case, the beam is injected through the dark port and I look at a pick-off of the REFL beam. The aux laser is phase locked to the PSL beam and I control the differential frequency between the two. The PSL and the aux beam interfere and beat at their differential frequency.
 
The attached plot shows the transmitted power as a function of the beat frequency.
 
Fitting the data with the model would let me determine the cavity length. 
By now I can estimate the length of the PRC at about 2.257m, but it's still a rather approximate value.
I can't provide accurate error bars yet. I need to optimize the measurements to get a more precise value.
 
I will go more through the details of the measurement technique and of the fitting function as soon as I have more definitive results.
 
The data points shown here were taken at different times and not always in optimal alignment condition of the PRC. 
To get a good fit of the data I should have fewer frequency segments, taken in a shorter period of time, and in which the power circulating inside of the cavity (ie SPOB) fluctuates as little as possible.
 
For what regards the time needed for a measurements, I already significantly sped up the measurements (i.e. optimizing the scanning and acquisition GPIB scripts, and fixing a couple of problems with the PDH box used in the PLL), and finally now I can scan several tens of MHz in few minutes.
About the frequency segments, so far they have been determined by two factors
1) Tthe frequency generator in the PLL: the Marconi works as a continuous wave generator only in limited ranges. Switching from one to another brakes the wave in a way that causes the PLL to lose lock.
2) Getting below 18 MHz a series of other beats appear on the PLL photodiode and make the PLL lose lock.
 
For the first problem, I'm thinking of using two Marconis and to mix their signals. I would keep one at 300MHz and I would scan the other from 300MHz to 500MHz. In fat, in that frequency range the Marconi has not discontinuity.
 
To try to avoid the other beats at low frequency, I'm not entirely sure about what to do yet. 
 
To be continued...
Attachment 1: 2010-01-19_PRCtransmissivityVsModel.png
2010-01-19_PRCtransmissivityVsModel.png
  2536   Thu Jan 21 10:31:13 2010 KojiUpdateABSLSome preliminary results from measuring PRC's transmissivity for an amplitude modulated beam

Nice and interesting plot.

I suppose slight decrease of the Schnupp asymmetry (in your model) adjusts the discrepancy in the high freq region.
At the same time, it will make the resonance narrower. So you need to put some loss at the recombination (=on the BS)?

...of course these depends on the flatness of the calibration.

  2541   Fri Jan 22 02:54:06 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLOvernight measurement

I'm leaving a measurement running overnight. It should be done in about one hour.

Tomorrow morning, If you need to use the interferometer, and you don't want to have the auxiliary beam going onto the dark port, you can turn down the flipping mirror and close the NPRO's mechanical shutter.

  2543   Fri Jan 22 14:40:49 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLOvernight measurement

Quote:

I'm leaving a measurement running overnight. It should be done in about one hour.

Tomorrow morning, If you need to use the interferometer, and you don't want to have the auxiliary beam going onto the dark port, you can turn down the flipping mirror and close the NPRO's mechanical shutter.

 This is what I measured last night:

2010-01-21_PRCtransmissivityVsModel.png

 This is not a fit. It's just a comparison of the model with the data.

  2545   Mon Jan 25 16:30:37 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSL166 MHz sideband turned off

I turned off the modulation at 166MHZ becasue I don't need it if I'm only locking the PRC.

It was introducing extra amplitude modulations of the beam which interfered with the AbsL's PLL photodiode.

I'm going to turn it back on later on.

  2546   Mon Jan 25 16:46:33 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSL166 MHz sideband turned off

Quote:

I turned off the modulation at 166MHZ becasue I don't need it if I'm only locking the PRC.

It was introducing extra amplitude modulations of the beam which interfered with the AbsL's PLL photodiode.

I'm going to turn it back on later on.

 I turned back on the 166MHz modulation just a bit. I set the slider at 4.156.

When it was totally off the MZ seemd quite unhappy.

  2547   Tue Jan 26 03:28:56 2010 ranaUpdateABSL166 MHz sideband turned off

 

 You can turn the 166 off if you want. MZ is unhappy after its turned off, but that's just the thermal transient from removing the RF heat. After a several minutes, the heat goes away and the MZ can be relocked.

One of these days we should evaluate the beam distortion we get in EOMs because of the RF heat induced dn/dT. Beam steering, beam size, etc.

  2550   Wed Jan 27 11:02:30 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLPRC Cavity Length
 I fitted the data from scanning the PRC by changing the beat frequency of the auxiliary laser beam with the PSL beam.
The data points that I've taken so far over the entire frequency range (0-300 MHz) are not continuous. For several reasons the PLL was unable to maintain lock for such a large range and I had to break it into smaller segments. The measurements to acquire them stretched over a too long period of time during which the status of the PRC changed.
 
Because of that, before I get a continuous set of data points (perhaps normalized by the circulating power inside of the cavity), I restricted the fit to a 55MHz range around 100MHz. I obtained the following numbers for the fit parameters:
Length PRC = 2.169 +/- 0.007 m
Schnupp Asymmetry: 0.471+/- 0.006 m
 
The fit is shown in the attached plot:
2010-01-21_PRCtransmissivityVsFit.png
When I fit over the entire set of data I get this:
 
2010-01-21_PRCtransmissivity_EntireFreqRange_VsFit.png
 
Length PRC = 2.224 +/- 0.005 m
Schnupp Asymmetry: 0.457+/- 0.005 m
 
The results are different. Evidently I have to improve the measurement. I'm working on it.
 
For posterity:
The function I used to fit the transmitted beat power vs. frequency is the following:
 
E_trans = - t_prm * r_itm * exp(1i*2*wb*l_prc/c) .* sin(wb*l_/c) ./ ( 1 + r_prm * r_itm * exp(1i*2*wb*l_prc/c) .* cos(wb*l_/c)
 
Where wb is the angular frequency of the beat, l_prc and l_ are the length of the PRC and the Schnupp asymmetry, respectively; r_itm, t_itm, r_prm, t_prm are reflectances and transmittances of PRM and ITM; c is the speed of light.
 
  2553   Fri Jan 29 12:06:58 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLMeasurement running today at lunch time

I just started a measuremtn that will be running for the next hour or so. Please be careful with the interferometer.

  2554   Fri Jan 29 13:14:49 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLMeasurement running today at lunch time

Quote:

I just started a measuremtn that will be running for the next hour or so. Please be careful with the interferometer.

Done. IFO available

  2576   Mon Feb 8 14:13:03 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLPLL Characterization

Lately I've been trying to improve the PLL for the AbsL experiment so that it could handle larger frequency steps and thus speed up the cavity scan.

The maximum frequency step that the PLL could handle withouth losing lock is given by the DC gain of the PLL. This is the product of the mixer's gain factor K [rad/V ], of the laser's calibration C [Hz/V] and of the PLL filter DC gain F(0).

I measured these quantities: K=0.226 V/rad; C=8.3e6 Hz/V and F(0)=28.7dB=21.5. The max frequency step should be Delta_f_max = 6.4MHz.

Although in reality the PLL can't handle more than a 10 KHz step. There's probably some other effect that I'm not.

I'm attaching here plots of the PLL Open Loop Gain, of the PLL filter and of a spectra of the error point measured in different circumstances.

I don't have much time to explain here how I took all those measurements. After I fix the problem, I'm going to go go through those details in an elog entry.

Does anyone have any suggestion about what, in principle, might be limiting the frequency step?

I already made sure that both cables going to the mixer (the cable with the beat signal coming from the photodiode and the cable with the LO signal coming from the Marconi) had the same length. Although ideally, for phase locking, I would still need 90 degrees of phase shift between the mixing signals, over the entire frequency range for which I do the cavity scan. By now the 90 degrees are not guaranteed.

Also, I have a boost that adds another 20 dB at DC to the PLL's filter. Although it doesn't change anything. In fact, as said above calculating the frequency step, the PLL should be able to handle 100KHz steps, as I would want the PLL to do.

Attachment 1: 2010-02-08_Old_PDH_Box_Filter_TF_gain_knob_0_Boost_OFF.png
2010-02-08_Old_PDH_Box_Filter_TF_gain_knob_0_Boost_OFF.png
Attachment 2: 2010-02-08_PLL_OLG_gain_knob_0_Boost_OFF.png
2010-02-08_PLL_OLG_gain_knob_0_Boost_OFF.png
Attachment 3: 2010-02-08_PLL_Noise_Budget.png
2010-02-08_PLL_Noise_Budget.png
  2577   Mon Feb 8 14:56:17 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLSuddenly a much better alignment of PRC

I just aligned PRM and locked PRC and I noticed that SPOB is much higehr than it used to be. It's now about 1800, vs 1200 than it used to be last week.

Isn't anyone related to that? If so, may I please know how he/she did it?

  2578   Mon Feb 8 15:01:46 2010 robUpdateABSLSuddenly a much better alignment of PRC

Quote:

I just aligned PRM and locked PRC and I noticed that SPOB is much higehr than it used to be. It's now about 1800, vs 1200 than it used to be last week.

Isn't anyone related to that? If so, may I please know how he/she did it?

 oops, my bad.  I cranked the 33MHz modulation depth and forgot to put it back.  The slider should go back to around 3. 

  2579   Mon Feb 8 15:41:51 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLSuddenly a much better alignment of PRC

Quote:

Quote:

I just aligned PRM and locked PRC and I noticed that SPOB is much higehr than it used to be. It's now about 1800, vs 1200 than it used to be last week.

Isn't anyone related to that? If so, may I please know how he/she did it?

 oops, my bad.  I cranked the 33MHz modulation depth and forgot to put it back.  The slider should go back to around 3. 

 I was actually hoping that the alignment got better.

  2581   Tue Feb 9 09:07:06 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLPLL Characterization

Quote:

Lately I've been trying to improve the PLL for the AbsL experiment so that it could handle larger frequency steps and thus speed up the cavity scan.

The maximum frequency step that the PLL could handle withouth losing lock is given by the DC gain of the PLL. This is the product of the mixer's gain factor K [rad/V ], of the laser's calibration C [Hz/V] and of the PLL filter DC gain F(0).

I measured these quantities: K=0.226 V/rad; C=8.3e6 Hz/V and F(0)=28.7dB=21.5. The max frequency step should be Delta_f_max = 6.4MHz.

Although in reality the PLL can't handle more than a 10 KHz step. There's probably some other effect that I'm not.

I'm attaching here plots of the PLL Open Loop Gain, of the PLL filter and of a spectra of the error point measured in different circumstances.

I don't have much time to explain here how I took all those measurements. After I fix the problem, I'm going to go go through those details in an elog entry.

Does anyone have any suggestion about what, in principle, might be limiting the frequency step?

I already made sure that both cables going to the mixer (the cable with the beat signal coming from the photodiode and the cable with the LO signal coming from the Marconi) had the same length. Although ideally, for phase locking, I would still need 90 degrees of phase shift between the mixing signals, over the entire frequency range for which I do the cavity scan. By now the 90 degrees are not guaranteed.

Also, I have a boost that adds another 20 dB at DC to the PLL's filter. Although it doesn't change anything. In fact, as said above calculating the frequency step, the PLL should be able to handle 100KHz steps, as I would want the PLL to do.

I might have found the problem with the PLL that was preventing me from scanning the frequencies by 100KHz steps. A dumb flimsy soldering in the circuit was making the PLL unstable.

After I fixed that problem and also after writing a cleverer data acquisition script in Python,  I was able to scan continuosly the range 10-200MHz in about 20min (versus the almost 1.5-2 hrs that I could do previously). I'm attaching the results to this entry.

The 'smears' on the right side of the resonance at ~33MHz, are due to the PSL's sideband. I think I know how to fix that.

As you can see, the problem is that the model for the cavity transmission still does not match very well the data. As a result, the error on the cavity length is too big (~> 10 cm - I'd like to have 1mm).

Anyway, that was only my first attempt of scanning. I'm going to repeat the measurement today too and see if I can come out better. If not, than I have to rethink the model I've been using to fit.

Attachment 1: 2010-02-08_PRCtransmissivity_EntireFreqRange_VsFit.png
2010-02-08_PRCtransmissivity_EntireFreqRange_VsFit.png
  2582   Tue Feb 9 10:10:58 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLback to analog

I want to try to do the measurement with the network analyzer used as local oscillator, instead of the Marconis that I'm using now. Tha could give me better noise rejection. It would also give me information about the phase.

Also I wouldn't dislike abandoning the GPIB interfaces to acquire data.

  2679   Thu Mar 18 10:46:51 2010 KojiUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

Last night (Mar 17) I checked the PLL setup as Mott have had some difficulty to get a clean lock of the PLL setting.

  • I firstly found that the NPRO beam is not going through the Faraday isolator well. This was fixed by aligning the steering mirrors before the Faraday.
     
  • The signal from the RF PD was send to the RF spectrum analyzer through a power splitter. This is a waist of the signal. It was replaced to a directional coupler.
     
  • Tee-ing the PZT feedback to the oscilloscope was producing the noise in the laser frequency. I put the oscilloscope to the 600Ohm output of the SR560, while connectiong the PZT output to the 50Ohm output.
     
  • In addition, 6dB+6dB attenuators have been added to the PZT feedback signal.

Now the beating signal is much cleaner and behave straight forward. I will add some numbers such as the PD DC output, RF levels, SR560 settings...

Now I am feeling that we definitely need the development of really clean PLL system as we use PLL everywhere! (i.e. wideband PD, nice electronics, summing amplifiers, stop poking SR560, customize/specialize PDH box, ...etc)

  2680   Thu Mar 18 12:27:56 2010 AlbertoUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

Quote:

Last night (Mar 17) I checked the PLL setup as Mott had some difficulty to get a clean lock of the PLL setting.

  • I firstly found that the NPRO beam is not going through the Faraday isolator well. This was fixed by aligning the steering mirrors before the Faraday.
     
  • The signal from the RF PD was send to the RF spectrum analyzer through a power splitter. This is a waist of the signal. It was replaced to a directional coupler.
  • Tee-ing the PZT feedback to the oscilloscope was producing the noise in the laser frequency. I put the oscilloscope to the 600Ohm output of the SR560, while connectiong the PZT output to the 50Ohm output.
  • In addition, 6dB+6dB attenuators have been added to the PZT feedback signal.

Now the beating signal is much cleaner and behave straight forward. I will add some numbers such as the PD DC output, RF levels, SR560 settings...

Now I am feeling that we definitely need the development of really clean PLL system as we use PLL everywhere! (i.e. wideband PD, nice electronics, summing amplifiers, stop poking SR560, customize/specialize PDH box, ...etc)

I also had noticed the progressive change of the aux NPRO alignment to the Farady.

I strongly agree about the need of a good and robust PLL.

By modifying the old PDH box (version 2008) eventually I was able to get a PLL robust enough for my purposes. At some point that wasn't good enough for me either.

I then decided to redisign it from scratch. I'm going to work on it. Also because of my other commitments, I'd need a few days/1 week for that. But I'd still like to take care of it. Is it more urgent than that?

  2681   Thu Mar 18 13:40:35 2010 KojiUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

We use the current PLL just now, but the renewal of the components are not immediate as it will take some time. Even so we need steady steps towards the better PLL. I appreciate your taking care of it.

Quote:

Quote:

Last night (Mar 17) I checked the PLL setup as Mott had some difficulty to get a clean lock of the PLL setting.

  • I firstly found that the NPRO beam is not going through the Faraday isolator well. This was fixed by aligning the steering mirrors before the Faraday.
     
  • The signal from the RF PD was send to the RF spectrum analyzer through a power splitter. This is a waist of the signal. It was replaced to a directional coupler.
  • Tee-ing the PZT feedback to the oscilloscope was producing the noise in the laser frequency. I put the oscilloscope to the 600Ohm output of the SR560, while connectiong the PZT output to the 50Ohm output.
  • In addition, 6dB+6dB attenuators have been added to the PZT feedback signal.

Now the beating signal is much cleaner and behave straight forward. I will add some numbers such as the PD DC output, RF levels, SR560 settings...

Now I am feeling that we definitely need the development of really clean PLL system as we use PLL everywhere! (i.e. wideband PD, nice electronics, summing amplifiers, stop poking SR560, customize/specialize PDH box, ...etc)

I also had noticed the progressive change of the aux NPRO alignment to the Farady.

I strongly agree about the need of a good and robust PLL.

By modifying the old PDH box (version 2008) eventually I was able to get a PLL robust enough for my purposes. At some point that wasn't good enough for me either.

I then decided to redisign it from scratch. I'm going to work on it. Also because of my other commitments, I'd need a few days/1 week for that. But I'd still like to take care of it. Is it more urgent than that?

 

  2684   Thu Mar 18 21:42:26 2010 KojiUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

I checked the setup further more.

  • I replaced the PD from NewFocus 1GHz one to Thorlabs PDA255.
  • I macthed the power level of the each beam.

Now I have significant fraction of beating (30%) and have huge amplitude (~9dBm).
The PLL can be much more stable now.

Koji

  2696   Mon Mar 22 22:11:26 2010 MottUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

 

 It looks like the PLL drifted alot over the weekend, and we couldn't get it back to 9 dBm.  We switched back to the new focus wideband PD to make it easier to find the beat signal.  I replaced all the electronics with the newly fixed UPDH box (#17) and we aligned it to the biggest beat frequency we could get, which ended up being -27 dBm with a -6.3V DC signal from the PD.  

Locking was still elusive, so we calculated the loop gain and found the UGF is about 45 kHz, which is too high.  We added a 20 dB attenuator to the RF input to suppress the gain and we think we may have locked at 0 gain.  I am going to add another attenuator (~6 dB) so that we can tune the gain using the gain knob on the UPDH box.  

Finally, attached is a picture of the cable that served as the smb - BNC adaptor for the DC output of the PD.  The signal was dependent on the angle of the cable into the scope or multimeter.  It has been destroyed so that it can never harm another innocent experiment again!

Attachment 1: IMG_0150.JPG
IMG_0150.JPG
  2697   Mon Mar 22 23:37:32 2010 MottUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

 

We have managed to lock the PLL to reasonable stability. The RF input is attenuated by 26 dBm and the beat signal locks very close to the carrier of the marconi (the steps on the markers of the spectrum analyzer are coarse).  We can use the marconi and the local boost of the pdh box to catch the lock at 0 gain.  Once the lock is on, the gain can be increased to stabilize the lock.  The locked signals are shown in the first photo (the yellow is the output of the mixer and the blue is the output to the fast input of the laser.  If the gain is increased too high, the error signal enters an oscillatory regime, which probably indicates we are overloading the piezo.  This is shown in the second photo, the gain is being increased in time and we enter the non-constant regime around mid-way through.

Tomorrow I will use this locked system to measure the PZT response (finally!).

Attachment 1: 2010-03-22_23.14.00.jpg
2010-03-22_23.14.00.jpg
Attachment 2: 2010-03-22_23.24.50.jpg
2010-03-22_23.24.50.jpg
  2703   Tue Mar 23 18:44:46 2010 MottUpdateABSLPLL reconstructed

 

 After realigning and getting the lock today, I tried to add in the SR785 to measure the transfer function.  As soon as I turn on the piezo input on the PDH box, however, the lock breaks and I cannot reacquire it.  We are using an SR650 to add in the signal from the network analyzer and that has worked. We also swapped the 20 dB attenuator for a box which mimics the boost functionality (-20 dB above 100 Hz, 0 dB below 6Hz).  I took some spectra with the SR750, and will get some more with the network analyzer once Alberto has finished with it. 

The SR750 spectra is posted below.  The SR750 only goes up to 100 kHz, so I will have to use the network analyzer to get the full range. 

Attachment 1: NPRO_PLL_freqresp.png
NPRO_PLL_freqresp.png
  4832   Fri Jun 17 16:05:07 2011 kiwamuUpdateABSLLightWave out of MOPA box

[Suresh / Kiwamu]

 We did the following things :

   - Took the LightWave NPRO out from the MOPA box

   - Temporarily took out the laser controller which has been connected to the Y end laser.

   - Put the LightWave on AP table and plugged the laser controller and confirmed that it still emits a beam

 DSC_3139_small.png

 

[Things to be done]

   - measure the beam profiles and power

   - get a laser controller, which will be dedicated for this laser, from Peter King

 

[Background and Motivation]

 The PRC and SRC length have to be precisely measured before the vent.

In order to measure those absolute length we are going to use the Stochino technique, which requires another laser to scan the cavity profiles.

The LightWave NPRO laser in the MOPA box was chosen for the Stochino laser because it has a large PZT range of 5 MHz/V and hence allows us to measure a wider frequency range.

The laser in the MOPA box had been connected to home-made circuits, which are not handy to play with. So we decided to use the laser with the usual laser controller.

Peter King said he has a LightWave laser controller and he can hand it to us.

Until we get the controller from him we do some preparations with temporary use of the Y end laser controller.

  4840   Mon Jun 20 11:38:49 2011 kiwamuUpdateABSLI-P curve of LightWave M126-1064-700

The I-P curve of the LightWave NPRO (M126-1064-700), which was taken out from the MOPA box, was measured. It looks healthy.

The output power can go up to about 1 W, but I guess we don't want it to run at a high power to avoid any further degradation since the laser is old.

 

IP_curve.png

 X-axis is the current read from the display of the controller. Y-axis is the output power, directly measured by Coherent PM10.

The measurement was done by changing the current from the controller.

Quote from #4832

 [Things to be done]

   - measure the beam profiles and power

   - get a laser controller, which will be dedicated for this laser, from Peter King

  4841   Mon Jun 20 13:48:25 2011 KojiUpdateABSLI-P curve of LightWave M126-1064-700

Hmm. Was the current within the operating range? (i.e. Is it a 700mW laser or a 1W one?)

You can obtain the nominal operating current from the old EPICS values (or some elog entries).

Note that NPROs are designed to be healthy only at around the nominal pumping power
(i.e. thermal gradient, and thermal lensing of the crystal, etc.)

ALSO:

Be aware that this laser should be used under the old SOP. So the appropriate interlocking is mandatory.

And probably we need to modify the SOP such that it reflects the latest situation.

Quote:

The I-P curve of the LightWave NPRO, which was taken out from the MOPA box, was measured. It looks healthy.

The output power can go up to about 1 W, but I guess we don't want it to run at a high power to avoid any further degradation since the laser is old.

  4842   Mon Jun 20 16:44:02 2011 steveUpdateABSLI-P curve of LightWave M126-1064-700

 

 Put the serial numbers into the elog. So we can identify the laser and controller in the future.

The old days the NPRO ( inside the MOPA ) was running ~1.7A  500 mW

  4855   Wed Jun 22 15:24:10 2011 kiwamuUpdateABSLgot a laser controller for LightWave

Peter King came over to the 40m with a laser controller and gave it to us.

We will test it out with the LightWave NPRO, which was used for MOPA.

Attachment 1: DSC_3150.JPG
DSC_3150.JPG
Attachment 2: DSC_3153.JPG
DSC_3153.JPG
  4872   Thu Jun 23 22:59:45 2011 kiwamuUpdateABSLI-P curve of LWE

 The I-P curve was measured again, but this time in a lower current range of 1.0-1.9 [A].

The plot below is the latest I-P curve.

IP_curve_small.png

(Decision)

Based on the measurement and some thoughts, I decided to run this laser at about 1.8 [A] which gives us a middle power of ~ 360 [mW].

In the 40m history, the laser had been driven at 2.4 [A] in years of approximately 2006-2009, so it's possible to run it at such a high power,

but on the other hand Steve suggested to run it with a smaller power such that the laser power doesn't degrade so fast.


(notes)

  The laser controller handed from PK (#4855) was used in this measurement.

The nominal current was tuned to be 1.8 [A] by tuning a potentiometer on the laser head (see page.18 on the manual of LWE).

There was a huge bump around 1.4 [A] and sudden power drop at 1.48 [A] although I don't know the reason.

Quote from #4842

The old days the NPRO ( inside the MOPA ) was running ~1.7A  500 mW

  4874   Fri Jun 24 00:13:24 2011 kiwamuUpdateABSLbeam profile measurement of LWE

The beam profile of the LWE (LightWave Electronics) NPRO was measured.

Mode matching telescopes will be designed and setup soon based on the result of the measurements.

 

Here is a plot of the measured beam profile.

beam_profile.png

 (some notes)

The measurement was done by using Kevin's power attenuation technique (#3030).

An window was put just after the NPRO and the reflected beam was sampled for the measurement to avoid the beam scan saturated.

ELOG V3.1.3-