40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 337 of 344 Not logged in
 New entries since: Wed Dec 31 16:00:00 1969
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
16779   Thu Apr 14 11:52:57 2022 yehonathanSummaryBHDPart IIa of BHR upgrade - POY11 debugging

{JC, Paco, Yehonathan, Ian}

POY lens was moved to infront of the POY steering mirror to make the POU beam focused on the POY11 RFPD. We measured the DC output with an oscilloscope and optimized it with the steering mirrors. We get ~ 16.5mV.

The new lens position blocked the BS OpLev ingoing beam, so we repositioned the OpLev mirrors to make the beam path not hit the lens.

We went to the control room to observe the PDH signal. We observed a series of PDF osscillation and then the signal died infront of our eyes! There is just noise.

We go and check the +/-15V powering the RFPD and we find that the V- is ~ 14V which is good but the V+ was ~ 2.7V which is not.

We went to the PD interface and measure the POY11 output oltages using a breakout board and got the same result.

The PD interface was taken out for inspection. All the OP27 on channel 3 were replaced with new ICs (without need turns out)...

The PD interface card turned out to be OK. What happened is that one of the Kepcos in the RF rack died because its fan crumbled as seen in Attachment #2 (could this be the source of burning smell?). In response, the rack was drawing from the other Kepco (connected in parallel) way too much current  (4A) and the current limiter dropped its voltage from 15V to 2.7V.

The Kepco pair was removed and replaced with a single Sorensen. The POY PDH signal was restored (see attachment).

Attachment 1: Screenshot_2022-04-14_15-53-39.png
Attachment 2: PXL_20220414_220616875.jpg
16799   Thu Apr 21 18:18:42 2022 yehonathanUpdateBHDPOX Alignment

{Yehonathan, Paco}

BS, ITMX and ETMX were aligned to get flashing in the X arm.

I aligned the POX beam on the ITMX table using a mixture of the old POP and POX optics. The beam was stirred to the POX11 RFPD. We measure the DC power using a scope but we see nothing. We went and saw that the POX11 cable was not connected to RF rack so we connected it along with some other RFPD cables.

We return but there is still no DC. We ndscope C1:LSC-POX11_I_ERR_DQ C1:LSC-POX11_Q_ERR_DQ and maximize the signal (attachment). The readout is very weak though. It should be as strong as POY which we already observed to have good SNR.

We also noticed that the one of the beam dumps for the POX RFPD is not glued and easily falls down.

Attachment 1: POX11_alignment.png
17041   Thu Jul 28 13:09:28 2022 yehonathanUpdateBHDMode matching considerations

The LO beam was found to have a power of 60uW, 10% of the power expected. We are pretty sure about the expectation because the AS beam has a power of 300uW, roughly the expected power. Additionally, the visibility of the MICH fringes in the BHDR is 40%.

If the mode-matching is perfect then we expect the visibility to be $\text{VIS}=\frac{I_\text{max}-I_\text{min}}{I_\text{max}+I_\text{min}}=\frac{2\sqrt{I_\text{LO}I_\text{AS}}}{I_\text{LO}+I_\text{AS}}=\frac{2\sqrt{300\cdot 60}}{300+600}$

which is roughly 74.5%.

If there is some mode-mismatch one can show that the visibility is $\text{VIS}=\frac{2\sqrt{M}\sqrt{I_\text{LO}I_\text{AS}}}{I_\text{LO}+I_\text{AS}}$, where $M=\left|\frac{\int \left(E_\text{LO}^\star E_\text{AS} \right)\mathrm{d}x \mathrm{d}y}{\sqrt{I_\text{LO}I_\text{AS}}}\right|^2$ is the mode-mismatch.

Using Finesse model I calculated \sqrt(M)=0.93 in the MICH configuration so the expected visibility is around 70%, far away from the observed 40%. To explain the observed visibility the mode mismatch would have to be ~ 30% which is very unlikely.

So it could either be a ghost beam or that the LO beam is clipped so badly that it also degrades its phase front (and therefore the mode-matching). The fact that we see fringes on the LO beam might suggest knife edge clipping on one of the auxiliary optics in the BS chamber.

17146   Tue Sep 20 15:40:07 2022 yehonathanUpdateBHDTrying doing AC lock

We resume the LO phase locking work. MICH was locked with an offset of 80 cts. LO and AS beams were aligned to maximize the BHD readout visibility on ndscope.

We lock the LO phase on a fringe (DC locking) actuating on LO1.

Attachment 1 shows BHD readout (DCPD_A_ERR = DCPD_A - DCPD_B) spectrum with and without fringe locking while LO2 line at 318 Hz is on. It can be seen that without the fringe locking the dithering line is buried in the A-B noise floor. This is probably due to multiple fringing upconversion. We figured that trying to directly dither-lock the LO phase might be too tricky since we cannot resolve the dither line when the LO phase is unlocked.

We try to handoff the lock from the fringe lock to the AC lock in the following way: Since the AC error signal reads the derivative of the BHD readout it is the least sensitive to the LO phase when the LO phase is locked on a dark fringe, therefore we offset the LO to realize an AC error signal. LO phase offset is set to ~ 40 cts (peak-to-peak counts when LO phase is uncontrolled is ~ 400 cts).

We look at the "demodulated" signal of LO1 from which the fringe locking error signal is derived (0 Hz frequency modulation 0  amplitude) and the demodulated signal of LO2 where a ~ 700 Hz line is applied. We dither the LO phase at ~ 50Hz to create a clear signal in order to compare the two error signals. Although the 50 Hz signal was clearly seen on the fringe lock error signal it was completely unresolved in the LO2 demodulated signal no matter how hard we drove the 700Hz line and no matter what demodulation phase we chose. Interestingly, changing the demodulation phase shifted the noisy LO2 demodulated signal by some constant. Will post a picture later.

Could there be some problem with the modulation-demodulation model? We should check again but I'm almost certain we saw the 700Hz line with an SNR of ~ 100 in diaggui, even with the small LO offset changes in the 700Hz signal phase should have been clearly seen in the demodulated signal. Maybe we should also check that we see the 50Hz side-bands around the 700Hz line on diaggui to be sure.

Attachment 1: Screenshot_2022-09-20_15-38-44.png
14825   Fri Aug 2 17:07:33 2019 yehonathan, gautamUpdateLoss Measurement

We run a loss measurement on the Y arm with 50 repetitions.

12825   Mon Feb 13 17:19:41 2017 yinziConfiguration configuring ethernet for raspberry pi

Gautam and I were able to get the Raspberry Pi up and running today, including being able to ssh into it from the control room.

Below are some details about the setup/procedure that might be helpful to anyone trying to establish Ethernet connection for a new RPi, or a new operating system/SD card.

Here is the physical setup:

The changes that need to be made for a new Raspbian OS in order to communicate with it over ssh are as follows, with links to tutorials on how to do them:

3. Enable ssh server: http://www.instructables.com/id/Use-ssh-to-talk-with-your-Raspberry-Pi/

The specific addresses for the RPi we set up today are:

Gateway/Routers/Domain Name Servers: 192.168.113.2

GV: I looked through /etc/var/bind/martian.hosts on chiara and decided to recycle the IP address for Domenica.martian as no RPis are plugged in right now... I'm also removing some of the attachments that seem to have been uploaded multiple times.

14205   Fri Sep 21 09:59:09 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY end table upgrade plan

[Yuki, Gautam]

Attachments #1 is the current setup of AUX Y Green locking and it has to be improved because:

• current efficiency of mode matching is about 50%
• current setup doesn't separate the degrees of freedom of TEM01 with PZT mirrors (the difference of gouy phase between PZT mirrors should be around 90 deg)
• we want to remotely control PZT mirrors for alignment
(Attachments #2 and #3)

One of the example for improvement is just adding a new lens (f=10cm) soon after the doubling crystal. That will make mode matching better (100%) and also make separation better (85 deg) (Attachments #4 and #5). I'm checking whether we have the lens and there is space to set it. And I will measure current power of transmitted main laser in order to confirm the improvement of alignment.

I am considering what component is needed.

Reference:

Attachment 1: Pic_CurrentSetup_AUXYgreen.jpeg
Attachment 2: ModeMatchingSolution_Current.pdf
Attachment 3: ModeMatchingSolution_Current_Magnified.pdf
Attachment 4: ModeMatchingSolution_Optimized.pdf
Attachment 5: ModeMatchingSolution_Optimized_Magnified.pdf
14211   Sun Sep 23 17:38:48 2018 yukiUpdateASCAlignment of AUX Y end green beam was recovered

[ Yuki, Koji, Gautam ]

An alignment of AUX Y end green beam was bad. With Koji and Gautam's advice, it was recovered on Friday. The maximum value of TRY was about 0.5.

14212   Sun Sep 23 19:32:23 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY end table upgrade plan

[ Yuki, Gautam ]

The setup I designed before has abrupt gouy phase shift between two steering mirrors which makes alignment much sensitive. So I designed a new one (Attached #1, #2 and #3). It improves the slope of gouy phase and the difference between steering mirrors is about 100 deg. To install this, we need new lenses: f=100mm, f=200mm, f=-250mm which have 532nm coating. If this setup is OK, I will order them.

There may be a problem: One lens should be put soon after dichroic mirror, but there is little room for fix it. (Attached #4, It will be put where the pedestal is.)  Tomorrow we will check this problem again.

And another problem; one steering mirror on the corner of the box is not easy to access. (Attached #5) I have to design a new seup with considering this problem.

 Quote: One of the example for improvement is just adding a new lens (f=10cm) soon after the doubling crystal. That will make mode matching better (100%) and also make separation better (85 deg) (Attachments #4 and #5). I'm checking whether we have the lens and there is space to set it. And I will measure current power of transmitted main laser in order to confirm the improvement of alignment.

Attachment 1: Pic_NewSetup0923_AUXYgreen.jpeg
Attachment 2: ModeMatchingSolution_Result.pdf
Attachment 3: ModeMatchingSolution_Magnified_0923.jpg
Attachment 4: pic0923_1.jpg
Attachment 5: pic0923_2.jpg
14214   Mon Sep 24 11:09:05 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY end table upgrade plan

[ Yuki, Steve ]

With Steve's help, we checked a new lens can be set soon after dichroic mirror.

 Quote: There may be a problem: One lens should be put soon after dichroic mirror, but there is little room for fix it. (Attached #4, It will be put where the pedestal is.)  Tomorrow we will check this problem again.
Attachment 1: pic0924_1.jpg
14216   Tue Sep 25 18:08:50 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY end table upgrade plan

[ Yuki, Gautam ]

We want to remotely control steeing PZT mirrors so its driver is needed. We already have a PZT driver board (D980323-C) and the output voltage is expected to be verified to be in the range 0-100 V DC for input voltages in the range -10 to 10 V DC.
Then I checked to make sure ir perform as we expected. The input signal was supplied using voltage calibrator and the output was monitored using a multimeter.
But it didn't perform well. Some tuning of voltage bias seemed to be needed. I will calculate its transfer function by simulation and check the performance again tommorow. And I found one solder was off so it needs fixing.

Reference:
diagram --> elog 8932

Plan of Action:

• Check PZT driver performs as we expected
• Also check cable, high voltage, PZT mirrors, anti-imaging board
• Obtain calibration factor of PZT mirrors using QPD
• Measure some status value before changing setup (such as tranmitted power of green laser)
• Revise setup after a new lens arrives
• Align the setup and check mode-matching
• Measure status value again and confirm it improves
• (write programming code of making alignment control automatically)
14218   Thu Sep 27 14:02:55 2018 yukiConfigurationASCPZT driver board verification

[ Yuki, Gautam ]

I fixed the input terminal that had been off, and made sure PZT driver board performs as we expect.

At first I ran a simulation of the PZT driver circuit using LTspice (Attached #1 and #2). It shows that when the bias is 30V the driver performs well only with high input volatage (bigger than 3V). Then I measured the performance as following way:

1. Applied +-15V to the board with an expansion card and 31.8V to the high voltage port which is the maximum voltage of PS280 DC power supplier C10013.
2. Terminated input and connectd input bias to GND, then set offset to -10.4V. This value is refered as elog:40m/8832.
3. Injected DC signal into input port using a function generator.
4. Measured voltage at the OUT port and MON port.

The result of this is attached #3 and #4. It is consistent with simulated one. All ports performed well.

• V(M1_PIT_OUT) = -4.86 *Vin +49.3 [V]
• V(M1_YAW_OUT) = -4.86 *Vin +49.2 [V]
• V(M2_PIT_OUT) = -4.85 *Vin +49.4 [V]
• V(M2_YAW_OUT) = -4.86 *Vin +49.1 [V]
• V(M1_PIT_MON) = -0.333 *Vin +3.40 [V]
• V(M1_YAW_MON) = -0.333 *Vin +3.40 [V]
• V(M2_PIT_MON) = -0.333 *Vin +3.40 [V]
• V(M2_YAW_MON) = -0.333 *Vin +3.40 [V]

The high voltage points (100V DC) remain to be tested.

Attachment 1: PZTdriverSimulationDiagram.pdf
Attachment 2: PZTdriverSimulationResult.pdf
Attachment 3: PZTdriverPerformanceCheck_ResultOUT.pdf
Attachment 4: PZTdriverPerformanceCheck_ResultMON.pdf
Attachment 5: PZTdriver.asc
Version 4
SHEET 1 2120 2120
WIRE 1408 656 1408 624
WIRE 1552 656 1552 624
WIRE 1712 656 1712 624
WIRE 1872 656 1872 624
WIRE 2016 656 2016 624
WIRE 1408 768 1408 736
WIRE 1552 768 1552 736
WIRE 1712 768 1712 736

... 193 more lines ...
14219   Sun Sep 30 20:14:51 2018 yukiConfigurationASCQPD calibration

[ Yuki, Gautam, Steve ]

Results:
I calibrated a QPD (D1600079, V1009) and made sure it performes well. The calibration constants are as follows:

X-Axis: 584 mV/mm
Y-Axis: 588 mV/mm

Details:
The calibration of QPD is needed to calibrate steeing PZT mirrors. It was measured by moving QPD on a translation stage. The QPD was connected to its amplifier (D1700110-v1) and +-18V was supplied from DC power supplier. The amplifier has three output ports; Pitch, Yaw, and Sum. I did the calibration as follows:

• Center beam spot on QPD using steering mirror, which was confirmed by monitored Pitch and Yaw signals that were around zero.
• Kept Y-axis micrometer fixed, moved X-axis micrometer and measured the outputs.
• Repeated the procedure for the Y-axis.

The results are attached. The main signal was fitted with error function and I drawed a slope at zero crossing point, which is calibration factor. I determined the linear range of the QPD to be when the output was in range -50V to 50V, then corresponding displacement range is about 0.2 mm width. Using this result, the PZT mirrors will be calibrated in linear range of the QPD tomorrow.

• Some X-Y coupling existed. When one axis micrometer was moved, a little signal of the other direction was also generated.
• As Gautam proposed in the previous study, there is some hysteresis. That process would bring some errors to this result.
• A scale of micrometer is expressed in INCH!
• The micrometer I used was made to have 1/2 inch range, but it didn't work well and the range of X-axis was much narrower.

Reference:
previous experiment by Gautam for X-arm: elog:40m/8873, elog:40m/8884

Attachment 1: QPDcalibrationXaxis.pdf
Attachment 2: QPDcalibrationYaxis.pdf
14221   Mon Oct 1 13:33:55 2018 yukiConfigurationASCQPD calibration
 Quote: I assume this QPD set is a D1600079/D1600273 combo. How much was the SUM output during the measurement? Also how much were the beam radii of this beam (from the error func fittings)? Then the calibration [V/m] is going to be the linear/inv-linear function of the incident power and the beam radus. You mean the linear range is +/-50mV (for a given beam), I guess.
• The SUM output was from -174 to -127 mV.
• The beam radii calculated from the error func fittings was 0.47 mm.
• Total optical path length measured by a ruler= 36 cm.
• Beam power measured at QPD was 2.96 mW. (There are some loss mechanism in the setup.)

Then the calibration factor of the QPD is

X axis: 584 * (POWER / 2.96mW) * (0.472mm /  RADIUS) [mV/mm]
Y axis: 588 * (POWER / 2.96mW) * (0.472mm /  RADIUS) [mV/mm].

Attachment 1: Pic_QPDcalibration.jpg
14224   Tue Oct 2 18:50:53 2018 yukiConfigurationASCPZT mirror calibration

[ Yuki, Gautam ]

I calibrated PZT mirrors. The ROUGH result was attached. (Note that some errors and trivial couplings coming from inclination of QPD were not considered here. This should be revised and posted again.)

The PZT mirrors I calibrated were:

• A 2-inch CVI mirror (45 degree, HR and AR for 532nm)
• A 1-inch Laseroptik mirror (45 degree, HR and AR for 532nm)

I did the calibration as follows:

• +-15V was supplied to PZT driver circuit, +100V to PZT driver bias, and +-18V to QPD amplifier.
• Optical path length was set to be same as that when I calibrated QPD, which is 36cm.
• The full range of CVI mirror is 3.5mrad according to its datasheet and linear range of QPD is 0.2mm, so I set the distance between PZT mirrors and QPD to be about 6cm. (I realized it was wrong. When mirror tilts 1 deg, the angle of beam changes 2 deg. So the distance should be the half.)
• After applying 0V to PZT driver input (at that time 50V was applied to PZT mirror), then centered beam spot on QPD using steering mirror, which was confirmed by monitored Pitch and Yaw signals of QPD that were around zero.
• In order to avoid hysteresis effect, I stared with an input signal of -10V. I then increased the input voltage in steps of 1V through the full range from -10V to +10V DC. The other input was kept 0V.
• Both the X and Y coordinates were noted in the plot in order to investigate pitch-yaw coupling.

The calibration factor was

• I made sure that PZT mirrors move linearly in full input range (+-10V).
• PZT CH1 input: Yaw, CH2: Pitch, CH3: +100V bias
• The calibration factor of PZT mirrors [mrad/V] are not consistent with previous calibration (elog:40m/8967). I will check it again.
• I measured the beam power in order to calibrate QPD responce with a powermeter, but it didn't have high precision. So I used SUM output of QPD to the calibration.
• Full range of PZT mirrors looks 2 times smaller.

Reference:
Previous calibration of the same mirrors, elog:40/8967

Attachment 1: PZTM1calibrationCH2.pdf
Attachment 2: PZTM1calibrationCH1.pdf
Attachment 3: PZTM2calibrationCH2.pdf
Attachment 4: PZTM2calibrationCH1.pdf
14226   Wed Oct 3 14:24:40 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY end table upgrade plan

Interim Procedure Report:

Purpose

The current setup of AUX Y-arm Green locking has to be improved because:

• current efficiency of mode matching is about 50%
• current setup doesn't separate the degrees of freedom of TEM01 with PZT mirrors (the difference of gouy phase between PZT mirrors should be around 90 deg)
• we want to remotely control PZT mirrors for alignment

What to do

• Design the new setup and order optices needed (finished!)
- As the new setup I designed, adding a new lens and slightly changing the position of optics are only needed. The new lens was arrived here.
• Check electronics (PZT, PZT driver, high voltage, cable, anti-imaging board) (finished!)

- All electronics were made sure performing well.
- The left thing to do is making a cable. (Today's tasks)
• Calibrate PZT mirror [mrad/V] (finished!)

- The result was posted here --> elog:40m/14224.
• Measure the status value of the current setup (power of transmitted light ...etc) (Tomorrow, --> finished!)
• Install them in the Y-end table and align the beam (Will start from Tomorrow) (The setup has a probrem I found on 10/04)
• Measure the status value of the new setup
- I want to finish above during my stay.
• Prepare the code of making alignment automaticaly
14227   Wed Oct 3 18:15:34 2018 yukiConfigurationASCAI board improvement

[ Yuki, Gautam ]

I improved Anti-Imaging board (D000186-Rev.D), which will be put between DAC port and PZT driver board.

It had notches at f = 16.6 kHz and 32.7 kHz, you can see them in the plot attached. So I replaced some resistors as follows:

• R6 and R7 replaced with 511 ohm (1206 thin film resistor)
• R8 replaced with 255 ohm (1206 thin film resistor)
• R14 and R15 replaced with 549 ohm (1206 thin film resistor)
• R16 replaced with 274 ohm (1206 thin film resistor)

Then the notch moved to 65.9 kHz (> sampling frequency of DAC = 64 kHz, good!).
(The plot enlarged around the notch frequency and the plot of all channels will be posted later.)

All electronics and optics seem to be ready.

Reference, elog:40m/8857
Diagram, D000186-D.pdf

Attachment 1: TF_AIboard.pdf
14228   Thu Oct 4 00:44:50 2018 yukiConfigurationASCAI board improvement

[ Yuki, Gautam ]

I made a cable which connects DAC port (40 pins) and AI board (25 pins). I will check if it works.

Tomorrow I will change setup for improvement of AUX Y-end green locking. Any optics for IR will not be moved in my design, so this work doesn't affect Y-arm locking with main beam.
While doing this work, I will do:

• check if the cable works
• make another cable which connects AI board (10 pins) and PZT driver (10 pins).
• check if eurocate in Y-rack (IY4?) applies +/-5V, +/-15V and +/-24V. It will be done using an expansion card.
• improve alignment servo for X-end.
• setup alignment servo for Y-end.
14230   Thu Oct 4 22:15:30 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY-end table upgrade

Before changing setup at Y-end table, I measured the status value of the former setup as follows. These values will be compared to those of upgraded setup.

• beam power going into doubling crystal (red12): 20.9 mW with filter, 1064nm
• beam power going out from doubling crystal (red12): 26.7 mW with filter, 532nm
• beam power going into faraday isolator (green5): 0.58 mW without filter, 532nm
• beam power going out from faraday isolator (green5): 0.54 mW without filter, 532nm
• beam power going to ETMY: 0.37 mW without filter, 532nm
• beam power of transmitted green light of Y-arm, which was measured by C1:ALS-TRY_OUT: 0.5 (see attachment #1)

(These numbers are shown in the attachment #2.)

The setup I designed is here. It can bring 100% mode-matching and good separation of degrees of TEM01, however I found a probrem. The picture of setup is attached #3. You can see the reflection angle at Y7 and Y8 is not appropriate. I will consider the schematic again.

Attachment 1: AUXYGreenLock20180921.jpg
Attachment 2: Pic_FormerSetup.jpeg
Attachment 3: Pic_CurrentSetup1004.jpg
14232   Fri Oct 5 17:32:38 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY-end table upgrade

I measured it with the wrong setting of a powermeter. The correct ones are here:

• beam power going into doubling crystal (red12): 240 mW, 1064nm
• beam power transmitted dichroic mirror (Y5): 0.70 mW, 532nm
• beam power going into faraday isolator (green5): 0.58 mW, 532nm
• beam power going out from faraday isolator (green5): 0.54 mW, 532nm
• beam power going to ETMY: 0.37 mW, 532nm
• beam power of transmitted green light of Y-arm, which was measured by C1:ALS-TRY_OUT: 0.5 (see attachment #1)

The calculated conversion efficiency of SHG crystal is 1.2%W.

14234   Fri Oct 5 22:49:22 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY-end table upgrade

I designed a new layout. It has good mode-matching efficiency, reasonable sensitivity to component positions, good Gouy phase separation. I'm setting optics in the Y-end table. The layout will be optimized again after finishing (rough) installation.  (The picture will be posted later)

14236   Sun Oct 7 22:30:42 2018 yukiConfigurationLSCYarm Green locking was recovered

I finished installation of optics in the Y-end and recovered green locking. Current ALS-TRY_OUTPUT is about 0.25, which is lower than before. So I still continue the alignment of the beam. The simulation code was attached. (Sorry. The optic shown as QWP2 is NOT QWP. It's HWP.)

Attachment 1: Pic_NewLayout1007.jpg
Attachment 2: YendGreenModeMatching.zip
14237   Mon Oct 8 00:46:35 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY-end table upgrade
 Quote: I measured it with the wrong setting of a powermeter. The correct ones are here: beam power going into doubling crystal (red12): 240 mW, 1064nm beam power transmitted dichroic mirror (Y5): 0.70 mW, 532nm beam power going into faraday isolator (green5): 0.58 mW, 532nm beam power going out from faraday isolator (green5): 0.54 mW, 532nm beam power going to ETMY: 0.37 mW, 532nm beam power of transmitted green light of Y-arm, which was measured by C1:ALS-TRY_OUT: 0.5 (see attachment #1)

After installation I measured these power again.

• beam power going into doubling crystal: 241 mW, 1064nm
• beam power transmitted dichroic mirror: 0.70 mW, 532nm
• beam power going into faraday isolator: 0.56 mW, 532nm
• beam power going out from faraday isolator: 0.53 mW, 532nm
• beam power going to ETMY: 0.36 mW, 532nm

There is a little power loss. That may be because of adding one lens in the beam path. I think it is allowable margin.

14240   Tue Oct 9 23:03:43 2018 yukiConfigurationLSCYarm Green locking was recovered

[ Yuki, Gautam, Steve ]

To align the green beam in Y-end these hardware were installed:

• PZT mirrors in Y-end table
• PZT driver in 1Y4 rack
• Anti-Imaging board in 1Y4 rack
• cables (DAC - AIboard - PZTdriver - PZT)
• high voltage supplier

I made sure that DAC CH9~16 and cable to AI-board worked correctly.

When we applied +100V to PZT driver and connected DAC, AI-board and PZT drive, the output voltage of the driver was not correct. I'll check it tomorrow.

Attachment 1: Pic_1Y4.jpg
Attachment 2: Pic_PZTcable.jpg
14241   Wed Oct 10 12:38:27 2018 yukiConfigurationLSCAll hardware was installed

I connected DAC - AIboard - PZTdriver - PZT mirrors and made sure the PZT mirrors were moving when changing the signal from DAC. Tomorrow I will prepare alignment servo with green beam for Y-arm.

14243   Thu Oct 11 13:40:51 2018 yukiUpdateComputer Scripts / Programsloss measurements
 Quote: This is the procedure I follow when I take these measurements for the XARM (symmetric under XARM <-> YARM): Dither-align the interferometer with both arms locked. Freeze outputs when done. Misalign ETMY + ITMY. ITMY needs to be misaligned further. Moving the slider by at least +0.2 is plentiful to not have the other beam interfere with the measurement. Start the script, which does the following: Resume dithering of the XARM Check XARM dither error signal rms with CDS. If they're calm enough, proceed. Freeze dithering Start a new set of averages on the scope, wait T_WAIT (5 seconds) Read data (= ASDC power and MC2 trans) from scope and save Misalign ETMX and wait 5s Read data from scope and save Repeat desired amount of times Close the PSL shutter and measure the PD dark levels

Information for the armloss measurement:

• Script which gets the data:  /users/johannes/40m/armloss/scripts/armloss_scope/armloss_dcrefl_asdcpd_scope.py
• Script which calculates the loss: /users/johannes/40m/armloss/scripts/misc/armloss_AS_calc.py
• Before doing the procedure Johannes wrote you have to prepare as follows:
• put a PD in anti-symmetric beam path to get ASDC signal.
• put a PD in MC2 box to get tranmitted light of IMC. It is used to normalize the beam power.
• connect those 2 PDs to oscilloscope and insert an internet cable to it.
• Usage: python2 armloss_dcrefl_asdcpd_scope.py [IP address of Scope] [ScopeCH for AS] [ScopeCH for MC] [Num of iteration] [ArmMode]

Note: The scripts uses httplib2 module. You have to install it if you don't have.

The locked arms are needed to calculate armloss but the alignment of PMC is deadly bad now. So at first I will make it aligned. (Gautam aligned it and PMC is locked now.)

gautam: The PMC alignment was fine, the problem was that the c1psl slow machine had become unresponsive, which prevented the PMC length servo from functioning correctly. I rebooted the machine and undid the alignment changes Yuki had made on the PSL table.

14245   Fri Oct 12 12:29:34 2018 yukiUpdateComputer Scripts / Programsloss measurements

With Gautam's help, Y-arm was locked. Then I ran the script "armloss_dcrefl_asdcpd_scope.py" which gets the signals from oscilloscope. It ran and got data, but I found some problems.

1. It seemed that a process which makes arm cavity mislaigned in the script didn't work.
2. The script "armloss_dcrefl_asdcpd_scope.py" gets the signal and the another script "armloss_AS_calc.py" calculates the arm loss. But output file the former makes doesn't match with the type the latter requires. A script converts format is needed.

Anyway, I got the data needed so I will calculate the loss after converting the format.

14248   Fri Oct 12 20:20:29 2018 yukiUpdateComputer Scripts / Programsloss measurements

I ran the script for measuring arm-loss and calculated rough Y-arm round trip loss temporally. The result was 89.6ppm. (The error should be considered later.)

The measurement was done as follows:

1. install hardware
1. Put a PD (PDA520) in anti-symmetric beam path to get ASDC signal.
2. Use a PD (PDA255) in MC2 box to get tranmitted light of IMC. It is used to normalize the beam power.
3. Connect those 2 PDs to oscilloscope (IP: 192.168.113.25) and insert an internet cable to it.
2. measure DARK noise
1. Block beam going into PDs with dampers and turn off the room light.
2. Run the script "armloss_dcrefl_acdcpd_scope.py" using "DARK" mode.
3. measure the ASDC power when Y-arm locked and misaligned
1. Remove dampers and turn off the room light.
2. Dither-align the interferometer with both arms locked. Freeze outputs when done. (Click C1ASS.adl>!MoreScripts>ON and click C1ASS.adl>!MoreScripts>FreezeOutputs.)
3. Misalign ETMX + ITMX. (Just click "Misalign" button.)
4. Further misalign ITMX with the slider. (see previous study: ITMX needs to be misaligned further. Moving the slider by at least +0.2 is plentiful to not have the other beam interfere with the measurement.)
5. Start the script "armloss_dcrefl_acdcpd_scope.py" using "ETMY" mode, which does the following:
1. Resume dithering of the YARM.
2. Check YARM dither error signal rms with CDS. If they're calm enough, proceed. (In the previous study the rms threshold was 0.7. Now "ETM_YAW_L_DEMOD_I" signal was 15 (noisy), then the threshold was set 17.)
3. Freeze dithering.
4. Start a new set of averages on the scope, wait T_WAIT (5 seconds).
5. Read data (= ASDC power and MC2 trans) from scope and save.
6. Misalign ETMY and wait 5s. (I added a code which switchs LSC mode ON and OFF.)
7. Read data from scope and save.
8. Repeat desired amount of times.
4. calculate the arm loss
1. Start the script "armloss_AS_calc.py", whose content is follows:
• requires given parameters: Mode-Matching effeciency, modulation depth, transmissivity. I used the same value as Johannes did last year, which are (huga)
• reads datafile of beam power at ASDC and MC2 trans, which file is created by "armloss_dcrefl_acdcpd_scope.py".
• calculates arm loss from the equation (see 12528 and 12854).

Result:

YARM
('AS_DARK =', '0.0019517200000000003') #dark noise at ASDC
('MC_DARK =', '0.02792') #dark noise at MC2 trans
('AS_LOCKED =', '2.04293') #beam power at ASDC when the cavity was locked
('MC_LOCKED =', '2.6951620000000003')
('AS_MISALIGNED =', '2.0445439999999997') #beam power at ASDC when the cavity was misaligned
('MC_MISALIGNED =', '2.665312')

$\hat{P} = \frac{P_{AS}-P_{AS}^{DARK}}{P_{MC}-P_{MC}^{DARK}}$ #normalized beam power

$\hat{P}^{LOCKED}=0.765,\ \hat{P}^{MISALIGNED}=0.775,\ \mathcal{L}=89.6\ \mathrm{ppm}$

• "ETM_YAW_L_DEMOD_I_OUTPUT" was little noisy even when the arm was locked.
• The reflected beam power when locked was higher than when misaligned. It seemed strange for me at first. Johannes suggested that it was caused by over-coupling cavity. It is possible when r_{ETMY}>>r1_{ITMY}.
• My first (wrong) measurement said the arm loss was negative(!). That was caused by lack of enough misalignment of another arm mirrors. If you don't misalign ITMX enough then the beam or scattered light from X-arm would bring bad. The calculated negative loss would be appeared only when $\frac{\hat{P}^{LOCKED}}{\hat{P}^{MISALIGNED}} > 1 + T_{ITM}$
• Error should be considered.
• Parameters given this time should be measured again.
14251   Sat Oct 13 20:11:10 2018 yukiUpdateComputer Scripts / Programsloss measurements
 Quote: the script "armloss_AS_calc.py", "ETM_YAW_L_DEMOD_I_OUTPUT" was little noisy even when the arm was locked. The reflected beam power when locked was higher than when misaligned. It seemed strange for me at first. Johannes suggested that it was caused by over-coupling cavity. It is possible when r_{ETMY}>>r1_{ITMY}.

Some changes were made in the script for getting the signals of beam power:

• The script sees "C1:ASS-X(Y)ARM_ETM_PIT/YAW_L_DEMOD_I_OUTPUT" and stops running until the signals become small, however some offset could be on the signal. So I changed it into waiting until (DEMOD - OFFSET) becomes small. (Yesterday I wrote ETM_YAW_L_DEMOD_I_OUTPUT was about 15 and was little noisy. I was wrong. That was just a offset value.)
• I added a code which stops running the script when the power of transmitted IR beam is low. You can set this threshold. The nominal value of "C1:LSC-TRX(Y)_OUT16" is 1.2 (1.0), so the threshold is set 0.8 now.

In the yesterday measurement the beam power of ASDC is higher when locked than when misaligned and I wrote it maybe caused by over-coupled cavity. Then I did a calculation as following to explain this:

• assume power transmissivity of ITM and ETM are 1.4e-2 and 1.4e-5.
• assume loss-less mirror, you can calculate amplitude reflectivity of ITM and ETM.
• consider a cavity which consists two mirrors and is loss-less, then $\frac{E_{r}}{E_{in}} = \frac{-r_1+r_2e^{i\phi}}{1-r_1r_2e^{i\phi}}$ holds. r1 and r2 are amplitude reflectivity of ITM and ETM, and E is electric filed.
• Then you can calculate the power of reflected beam when resonated and when anti-resonated. The fraction of these value is $\frac{P_{RESONANT}}{P_{ANTI-RESO}} = 0.996$, which is smaller than 1.
• I found this calculation was wrong! Above calculatation only holds when cavity is aligned, not when misaligned. 99.04% of incident beam power reflects when locked, and (100-1.4)% reflects when misaligned. The proportion is P(locked)/P(misaligned)=1.004, higher than 1.

14254   Mon Oct 15 10:32:13 2018 yukiUpdateComputer Scripts / Programsloss measurements

I used these values for measuring armloss:

• Transmissivitity of ITM = 1.384e-2 * (1 +/- 1e-2)
• Transmissivitity of ETM = 13.7e-6 * (1 +/- 5e-2)
• Mode-Matching efficiency of XARM = 0.912 * (1 +/- 2e-2)
• Mode-Matching efficiency of YARM = 0.867 * (1 +/- 2e-2)
• modulation depth m1 (11MHz) = 0.179 * (1 +/- 2e-2)
• modulation depth m2 = 0.226 * (1 +/- 2e-2),

then the uncertainties reported by the individual measurements are on the order of 6 ppm (~6.2 for the XARM, ~6.3 for the YARM). This accounts for fluctuations of the data read from the scope and uncertainties in mode-matching and modulation depths in the EOM. I made histograms for the 20 datapoints taken for each arm: the standard deviation of the spread is over 6ppm. We end up with something like:

XARM: 123 +/- 50 ppm
YARM: 152+/- 50 ppm

This result has about 40% of uncertaintities in XARM and 33% in YARM (so big... ).

In the previous measurement, the fluctuation of each power was 0.1% and the fluctuation of P(Locked)/P(misaligned) was also 0.1%. Then the uncertainty was small. On the other hand in my measurement, the fluctuation of power is about 2% and the fluctuation of P(Locked)/P(misaligned) is 2%. That's why the uncertainty became big.

We want to measure tiny value of loss (~100ppm). So the fluctuation of P(Locked)/P(misaligned) must be smaller than 1.6%.

(Edit on 10/23)
I think the error is dominated by systematic error in scope. The data of beam power had only 3 degits. If P(Locked) and P(misaligned) have 2% error, then
$\frac{P_L}{P_M}\frac{1}{1+T_{\mathrm{ITM}}} = 0.99(3)$.
You have to check the configuration of scope.

Attachment 1: XARM_20181015_1500.pdf
Attachment 2: YARM_20181015_1500.pdf
 Quote: but there's one weirdness: It get's the channel offset wrong. However this doesn't matter in our measurement because we're subtracting the dark level, which sees the same (wrong) offset.

When you do this measurement with oscilloscope, take care two things:

1. set y-range of scope as to every signal fits in display: otherwise the data sent from scope would be saturated.
2. set y-position of scope to the center and don't change it; otherwise some offset would be on the data.
14257   Mon Oct 15 20:11:56 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY end table upgrade plan

Final Procedure Report for Green Locking in YARM:

Purpose

The current setup of AUX Y-arm Green locking has to be improved because:

• current efficiency of mode matching is about 50%
• current setup doesn't separate the degrees of freedom of TEM01 with PZT mirrors (the difference of gouy phase between PZT mirrors should be around 90 deg)
• we want to remotely control PZT mirrors for alignment

What to do

• Design the new setup and order optices needed (finished!)
- As the new setup I designed, adding a new lens and slightly changing the position of optics are only needed. The new lens was arrived here.
• Check electronics (PZT, PZT driver, high voltage, cable, anti-imaging board) (finished!)

- All electronics were made sure performing well.
- The left thing to do is making a cable. (Today's tasks)
• Calibrate PZT mirror [mrad/V] (finished!)

- The result was posted here --> elog:40m/14224.
• Measure the status value of the current setup (power of transmitted light ...etc) (finished!)
• Install them in the Y-end table and align the beam (Almost finished!) (GTRY signal is 0.3 which means Mode-Matching efficiency is about 30%. It should be improved.)
• Measure the status value of the new setup (finished!)
• Prepare the code of making alignment automaticaly
• see sitemap.adl>ASC>c1asy. I prepared medm. If you move PZT SLIDERS then you can see the green beam also moves.
• Preparing filters is needed. You can copy them from C1ASX.
• Note that now you cannot use C1ASX servo because filters are not applied.
14258   Tue Oct 16 00:44:29 2018 yukiUpdateComputer Scripts / Programsloss measurements

The scripts for measuring armloss are in the directory "/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/lossmap_scripts/armloss_scope".

• armloss_derefl_asdcpd_scope.py: gets data and makes ascii file.
• armloss_AS_calc.py: calculates armloss from selected a set of files.
• armloss_calc_histogram.py: calculates armloss from selected files and makes histogram.
14260   Wed Oct 17 20:46:24 2018 yukiConfigurationASCY end table upgrade plan

To do for Green Locking in YARM:

The auto-alignment servo should be completed. This servo requires many parameters to be optimized: demodulation frequency, demodulation phase, servo gain (for each M1/2 PIT/YAW), and matrix elements which can remove PIT-YAW coupling.

14280   Wed Nov 7 05:16:16 2018 yukiUpdateComputer Scripts / Programsarm loss measuremenents

Please check your data file and compare with those Johannes made last year. I think the power in your data file may have only three-disits and flactuate about 2%, which brings huge error. (see elog: 40m/14254)

 Quote: On running the script again, I'm getting negative values for the loss.
3622   Wed Sep 29 16:56:36 2010 yutaUpdateVAC2 doors opened

(Steve, Koji, Joe, Kiwamu, Yuta)

Background:
The vent was started on Monday, and finished on Tuesday.
We were to open the doors on Tuesday, but we couldn't because the vertex crane got out of order.
Now the crane was fixed, and so we opened the doors today.

What we did:

We opened the north side of the BS chamber and the west side of the ITMX chamber.
Now, the light doors are put instead.

3623   Wed Sep 29 18:28:32 2010 yutaUpdateComputersaldabella connects to the wireless network

Background:
We need laptops that connect to the wireless network to use them in the lab.

aldabella:
Dell Inspiron E1505 laptop
Broadcom Corporation BCM4311 802.11b/g WLAN (rev 01) (PCIID: 14e4:4311 (rev 01))

What I did:
1. I followed this method(Japanese!): http://www.linuxmania.jp/wireless_lan.html
Except I installed ndiswrapper-1.56 and cabextracted sp32156.exe.
Also, I didn't run
# ndiswrapper -m

2. Then I did step #6 in here: http://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8080/40m/1275
Note that the hardware is eth1 instead of wlan0.

3. Added the following line to /etc/rc.d/rc.local to make ndiswrapper load on every boot:
 /sbin/modprobe ndiswrapper

Result:
aldabella now connects to the wireless martian network on every boot!!

Note:
Somehow, the method that uses Broadcom official driver doesn't work.
It returns the following error when activating eth1:   Error for wireless request "Set Encode" (8B2A) :     SET failed on device eth1 ; Invalid argument.   Error for wireless request "Set Encode" (8B2A) :     SET failed on device eth1; Invalid argument.

3627   Thu Sep 30 14:09:33 2010 yutaUpdateComputersmariabella connects to the wireless network

Background:
We need laptops that connect to the wireless network to use them in the lab.

mariabella:
Dell Inspiron 1210 laptop
Broadcom Corporation BCM4312 802.11b/g (rev 01) (PCIID: 14e4:4315 (rev 01))

What I did:
1. I followed the same steps I did for aldabella: http://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8080/40m/3623
Except I unzipped R151517-pruned.zip.

2. Note that the PCIID is important for driver selection. Not the model No.
To check whether your driver selection is correct, run:
# ndiswrapper -l
after installing the driver.
If the driver selection is wrong, it will return only:
bcmwl5 : driver installed
If correct, it will return:
bcmwl5 : driver installed          device (14E4:4315) present (alternate driver: hoge)

Result:
aldabella now connects to the wireless martian network.

Note:

Broadcom official driver didn't work for mariabella, too.

3630   Thu Sep 30 18:51:50 2010 yutaUpdateComputerssetting up aldabella and mariabella

(Kiwamu, Yuta)

Background:
We wanted to make aldabella and mariabella know how to work.

What we did:

1. Added 2 lines to /etc/rc.local
 /sbin/modprobe ndiswrapper  sleep 10  mount linux1:/home/cds/ /cvs/cds

2. Edited ~/.cshrc
 source /cvs/cds/caltech/cshrc.40m

Result:
Working environment is set to aldabella and mariabella. They have their access to the main system, linux1, now.

Note:
fstab doesn't work for aldabella and mariabella because the mount should be done after ndiswrapper loads.

3645   Mon Oct 4 19:48:00 2010 yutaUpdateVACseveral mirrors installed to ITMX/BS chamber

(Koji, Kiwamu, Yuta)

Lots of progress for the optics placement in the vacuum chamber.
We are ready to go to the next step: open the access connector between IMC and OMC.

### Background:

The actual work in the vacuum chamber started.
The first goal of the vent is to get the green beam coming out from the chambers to the PSL table.

### What we did:

1. Inspection of the tip-tilt suspension

The alignments of the TTs were inspected. We had five TTs having been sitting on the table in Bob's clean room.
Prior to their installation we checked the alignments of those because they sometimes showed large hysteresis mainly in the pitch directions.

If a TT has the hysteresis, the pitch position doesn't come back to the previous position. This may cause an issue of the interferometer operation.

- SN001, SN003, SN005 looked well aligned and show no hysteresis.

- The alignment of SN002 was not so good (theta ~ 0.004 rad ) compared to those three, but no hysteresis, we think this guy is still acceptable for the installation.

- SN004 had an apparent hysteresis. This guy doesn't come back to the previous place, being applied a touch. We have to fix this at some point.

2. Work in the ITMX chamber

Now all of the optic in this chamber was installed in the approximate place.

- Installed POX/POP steering mirrors.

- TT(SN003) was placed.

- The two steering optics for ITMX OPLEV were placed at the designed positions.

3. Work in the BS chamber

Installed 2 TTs to the BS chamber.
- SR3: TT(SN001)
- PR3: TT(SN005)

After the alignment of the green steering mirrors, we confirmed
the green beam is successfully hitting the west wall of the OMC chamber.

Those TTs are approximately aligned using the weakly reflected green beams.

### Next work:

- Open the access connector

- Place another periscope and two steering mirrors for green

- Damping of the suspended optics

- Resurrect MC and its stable lock

- Remove MCT pickoff path

- Align optics in the main path

- Recycled Michelson lock

Attachment 1: P1060901.JPG
Attachment 2: P1060904.JPG
3656   Tue Oct 5 21:22:46 2010 yutaUpdateVACgreen beam reached PSL table

YES ! We got the green light coming out from the OMC chamber to the PSL table !

(Koji, Kiwamu, Yuta)

Background

As a result of the work in the chambers, the green beam reached the OMC chamber yesterday.
Today's mission was to let the green beam coming out from the chambers to the PSL table.

What we did:
1. Installed the last three steering mirrors.
The mirrors were 532 HR mirror with AR and 1deg wedge (CVI Y2-LW-1-2050-UV-45-P/AR).
Two of them are placed to the MC chamber. Another one was to the OMC chamber

During putting the mirrors to the MC chamber, we found that a cable tower was sitting on a position exactly where we wanted to put one of the mirrors.

So we moved the tower to the very south west corner.

2. Installed a periscope to the MC chamber

The function of this periscope is to lower the beam height of the green light which is risen up by another periscope in the BS chamber.

We aligned it to the green beam, so that the beam hits the center of the mirrors on the periscope.

3. Aligned the optics

We aligned the green mirrors so that we can let the green beam go out from the chamber.

Actually the inside of the OMC chamber didn't look like the same as that of our optical layout.

For example there is unknown base plate, which apparently disturbs the location of our last steering mirror.

Therefore we had to change the designed position of the steering mirror.

Now the mirror is sitting near the designed position (~ 1/2 inch off), but it's fine because it doesn't clip any 1064 beam.

Result:

The green beam is now hitting the north wall of the PSL table.

Notes:

The green beam looks having some fringes, it may be caused by a multiple reflection from a TT when the green beam goes through it. We are going to check it.

Next work:

- Damping of the suspended optics

- Resurrect MC and its stable lock

- Remove MCT pickoff path

- Align optics in the main path

- Recycled Michelson lock

3667   Thu Oct 7 14:39:50 2010 yutaUpdatePSLmeasured PMC's laser power-output relation

(Rana, Yuta)

Motivation:

We wanted to see thermal effects on the PMC.

What I did yesterday:
Changed the current of the NPRO from 2A to 0.8A and measured the power of the reflected/transmitted light from the PMC when locked.
I also measured the power of the reflected light when PMC is not locked (It supposed to be proportional to the output power of the laser).

Result:
Attached. Hmmmm......
At several points of the laser current, I could'nt lock the PMC very well. The power of the reflected/transmitted light depend on the offset voltage of the PZT.
When the laser power was weak(~<0.9A), the power of reflected/transmitted light changed periodically(~ several minutes).

Attachment 1: PMCreflect.png
3672   Thu Oct 7 16:34:06 2010 yutaUpdatePSLmeasured PMC's laser power-output relation

Result2:
Attached is the visibility vs incident power(assuming output of the PD is proportional to the input laser power).
Ideally, the graph should be flat. (In another words, attached graph in the elog #3667 shoud be linear.)
But the visibility reduces with higher laser power in this graph. This is maybe because of the thermal effect. I'm thinking about how to confirm this.

Quote:

It was a bit difficult to comprehend the result.
Is it good? or bad? Have you seen the thermal effect? or not?

- Put linear lines to show the visibility of the cavity.

- Calibrate the incident power and make another plot to show the visibility (%) vs the incident power (W).

 Quote: (Rana, Yuta) Motivation:  We wanted to see thermal effects on the PMC. What I did yesterday:  Changed the current of the NPRO from 2A to 0.8A and measured the power of the reflected/transmitted light from the PMC when locked.  I also measured the power of the reflected light when PMC is not locked (It supposed to be proportional to the output power of the laser). Result:  Attached. Hmmmm......  At several points of the laser current, I could'nt lock the PMC very well. The power of the reflected/transmitted light depend on the offset voltage of the PZT.  When the laser power was weak(~<0.9A), the power of reflected/transmitted light changed periodically(~ several minutes).

Attachment 1: PMCvis.png
3674   Thu Oct 7 17:53:07 2010 yutaUpdateComputersFarfalla with Firefox, fixed

(Kiwamu, Yuta)

Symptom:
Farfalla(Acer Aspire one KAV60 netbook) couldn't run Firefox and returned the following error:
Error: platform version '1.9.2.8' is not compatible with
minVersion >= 1.9.2.9
maxVersion <= 1.9.2.9

What we did:
1. Added the following line to ~/.cshrc.
alias firefox "/usr/lib/firefox-3.6/firefox"
2. Made a cool launcher for firefox.

Result:
Farfalla can fly into the web with Firefox now.

Notes:

Even if it was then before, bash could run firefox. tsch couldn't.
The command firefox was /cvs/cds/caltech/apps/linux/bin/firefox for tsch, because of the source /cvs/cds/caltech/cshrc.40m.
I did this to zita which had the same symptom, too.

Next work:

Farfalla wakes up on the wrong side of the bed. This has to be fixed.

3675   Thu Oct 7 23:24:44 2010 yutaUpdateCDSchecking MC1 suspension damping

Background:
The new CDS is currently being set up.
We want to see if the damping servo of the suspensions are working correctly.
But before that, we have to see if the sensors and the coils are working correctly.
Among the 8 optics, MCs take top priority because of the green beam. for the alignment of the in-vac optics.

What I did:
By seeing the 5 sensor outputs (C1:SUS-MC1_XXSEN_IN1, XX=UL,UR,LR,LL,SD) with the Data Viewer, I checked if all the coils are kicking in the supposed direction and all the sensors are sensing that kick correctly.

All the matrices elements were set to the ideal values(-1 or 0 or 1) this time.

Result:
They were perfect.
1. POSITION seemed to be POSITION
When the offset(C1:SUS-MC1_SUSPOS_OFFSET) was added, all the sensor output moved to the same direction.
2. PITCH seemed to be PITCH
When the offset(C1:SUS-MC1_PIT_COMM) was changed, UL&UR and LL&LR went to the different direction.
3. YAW seemed to be YAW
When the offset(C1:SUS-MC1_YAW_COMM) was changed, UL&LL and UR&LR went to the different direction.
4. SIDE seemed to be SIDE
When the offset(C1:SUS-MC1_SDSEN_OFFSET) was added, DC level of the SD sensor output changed.

Notes:

c1mcs crashed many times during the investigation, and I had to kill and restart it again and again.
It seemed to be easily crashed when filters are on, and so I couldn't check whether the damping servo is working correctly or not today.

Next work:

- fix c1mcs (and maybe others)
- check the damping servo by comparing the displacements of each 4 degrees of freedom when servo in off and on.

3689   Mon Oct 11 16:09:10 2010 yutaSummarySUScurrent OSEM outputs

Background:
The output range of the OSEM is 0-2V.
So, the OSEM output should fluctuate around 1V.
If not, we have to modify the position of it.

What I did:
Measured current outputs of the 5 OSEMs for each 8 suspensions by reading sensor outputs(C1:SUS-XXX_YYPDMON) on medm screens.

Result:

 BS ITMX ITMY PRM SRM MC1 MC2 MC3 UL 1.20 0.62 1.69 1.18 1.74 1.25 0.88 1.07 UR 1.21 0.54 1.50 0.99 1.77 1.64 1.46 0.31 LR 1.39 0.62 0.05 0.64 2.06 1.40 0.31 0.19 LL 1.19 0.88 0.01 0.64 1.64 1.00 0.05 1.03 SD 1.19 0.99 0.97 0.79 1.75 0.71 0.77 0.93

White: OK (0.8~1.2)
Yellow: needs to be fixed

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

(Joe, Yuta)

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

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

2. Set datarate to 2048 for each DAQ.

3. Restarted fb(frame builder).

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

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

3692   Mon Oct 11 22:04:28 2010 yutaUpdateCDSdamping for MCs are basically working

Background:
Even if we can't use the Dataviewer to get the time series of each 4 DOF displacements, we can still use StripTool to monitor the ringdowns and see if the damping servo is working.

What I did:
1. Excited vibration by kicking the mirror randomly (by putting some offsets randomly and turing the filters on and off randomly).

2. Turned all the servo off by clicking "ShutDown" button.

3. Turned all the servo on by clicking "Normal" button.

3. Monitored each 4 DOF displacements with StripTool and see if there are any considerably low-Q ringdown after turning on the servo.
The values I monitored are as follows;
C1:SUS_MCX_SUSPOS_INMON
C1:SUS_MCX_SUSPIT_INMON
C1:SUS_MCX_SUSYAW_INMON
C1:SUS_MCX_SDSEN_INMON  (X=1,2,3)

All the settings I used for this observation are automatically saved here;
/cvs/cds/caltech/burt/autoburt/snapshots/2010/Oct/11/21:07/c1mcs.epics

Result:
Attached is the screenshots of StripTool Graph window for each 3 MCs.
As you can see, the dampings for each DOF, each MCs are basically working.

Note:
Do NOT turn off all the damping servo by clicking "Damp" buttons or setting the SUSXXX_GAIN to 0. It crashes c1mcs.

Next work:
- check and relate the signal sign with the actual moving direction of the optics
- fix data aquisition system
- measure Q-values when the servo is on and off using DAQ and Dataviewer

Attachment 1: SUS-MC1.png
Attachment 2: SUS-MC2.png
Attachment 3: SUS-MC3.png
3697   Tue Oct 12 15:51:18 2010 yutaBureaucracySAFETYthe 40m squad received safety training from Peter

Yuta, Joonho, and Suresh received the Basic Laser Safety Training from Peter King today.

Now, we got homework.

3699   Tue Oct 12 17:42:57 2010 yutaUpdateSUSvery first measurement of Q-values for MC1

Background:
Data aquisition system is fixed, and now we can use the Dataviewer to measure Q-values of the ringdowns for each DOF, each optics.
First of all, I measured MC1 suspention damping servo for a test.

What I did:
1. Used DAQ channels activated in this entry(#3690) to see and compare the ringdowns when the damping servo is on and off with the Dataviewer.

2. Plotted the data and fitted the ringdown using this formula;
p[0]*exp(-p[1]*t)*sin(p[2]*t+p[3])+p[4]
I used python's scipy.optimize.leastsq for the fitting.

3. Calculated the resonant frequency f0 and Q-value using following formulas;
f0=2*pi*sqrt(p[1]**2+p[2]**2)
Q=f0/(2*pi)/(2*p[1])

4. For plotting, I subtracted the offset(=p[4]).

All parameters I used for this measurement are automatically saved here;
/cvs/cds/caltech/burt/autoburt/snapshots/2010/Oct/12/13:07/c1mcs.epics
(-1,0,1 for all matrix elements, GAIN=3,3,3,150 for POS,PIT,YAW,SIDE)

Result:
Attached is the plot of each 4 DOF ringdown when servo is off and on.
"servo off" means off for that DOF. Servo for the other 3 DOFs are on.

As you can see clearly, the damping servo is working.

The resonant frequencies and Q-values calculated from the fitting are as follows;

 servo off servo on f0 (Hz) Q f0 (Hz) Q POS 0.97 large 0.97 16 PIT 0.71 96 0.73 6.9 YAW 0.80 100 0.82 8.9 SIDE 0.99 large 0.99 27

Resonant frequencies and Q-values have about 1% and 10% error respectively.
I estimated it from my 2-time measurement of the POS ringdown.

Next work:
- Find and modify some scripts to optimize the matrix elements
- Calibrate the displacement
- Do the same thing for other optics

Attachment 1: MC1ringdown.png
ELOG V3.1.3-