I just started a measuremtn that will be running for the next hour or so. Please be careful with the interferometer.
Done. IFO available
Zach made me notice that the elog had crashed earlier on this afternoon.
I just restarted it with the restarting script.
Instructions on how to run the last one are now in the wiki page. Look on the "How To" section, under "How to restart the elog".
Again, this morning Zach told me that the elog had crashed while he was trying to post an entry.
I just restarted it.
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 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.
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.
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.
In the last two days Steve and I took some optics away from the both ETM end table.
This is because we need an enough space to set up the green locking stuff into the end table, and also need to know how much space is available.
Optics we took away are : Alberto's RF stuff, fiber stuff and some optics obviously not in used.
The picture taken after the removing is attached. Attachment1:ETMX, Attachment2:ETMY
And the pictures taken before the removing are on the wiki, so you can check how they are changed.
The PD Kiwamu removed from the Y table was TRY, which we still need.
My bad if he took that. By mistake I told him that was the one I installed on the table for the length measurement and we didn't need it anymore.
I'm going to ask Kiwamu if he can kindly put it back.
Since last Friday either the arms or the PRC can't lock.
The montors show the beam flashing on the end mirrors, but the cavity can't get locked. The error signal looks fine. I suspect a computer problem.
Also PRC can't lock. SPOB is suspiciously stuck at about -95. Although that's not a fixed number, but covering the by hand the SPOB PD on the ITMY table doesn't change the number. I check the DC output of the photodetector and it is actually seen the beam.
Suspecting computer problems started after last Thursday's IP switch, I rebooted the frame builder, c1dcuepics, c1daqctrl and all the front ends. I then burtrestored to February 1st at 1:00 am.
Before I burtrestored c1iscepics, SPOB had gone back to more typical numbers around 0, as it usually read when PRC wasn't locked.
But burtrestoring c1iscepics, return it to the -95 of earlier.
Burterestoring to other times or dates didn't solve the problems.
This is a simple representation of the schematic:
gnd# |# Cw2# |# n23# |# Lw2# |# n22# |# Rw2 # | |\ # n2- - - C2 - n3 - - - - | \ # | | | | |4106>-- n5 - Rs -- no# iinput Rd L1 L2 R24 n6- | / | |# nin - | | | | | |/ | Rload # Cd n7 R22 gnd | | | # | | | | - - - R8 - - gnd # gnd R1 gnd R7 # | |# gnd gnd# ##
I chose the values of the components in a realistic way, that is using part available from Coilcraft or Digikey.
Using LISO I simulated the Tranfer Function and the noise of the circuit.
I'm attaching the results.
I'll post the 55MHz rfpd later.
oops, forgotten the third attachment...
here it is
# Resonant RF diode front end
I read a few datasheets of the C30642GH photodiode that we're going to use for the 11 and 55 MHz. Considering the values listed for the resistance and the capacitance in what they define "typical conditions" (that is, specific values of bias voltage and DC photocurrent) I fixed Rd=25Ohms and Cd=175pF.
Then I picked the tunable components in the circuit so that we could adjust for the variability of those parameters.
Finally with LISO I simulated transfer functions and noise curves for both the 11 and the 55MHz photodiodes.
I'm attaching the results and the LISO source files.
Last night (Mar 17) I checked the PLL setup as Mott had some difficulty to get a clean lock of the PLL setting.
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...
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?
I found the elog down and I restarted it.
Then, after few seconds it was down again. Maybe someone else was messing with it. I restarted an other 5 times and eventually it came back up.
I spent some time trying to understand how touching the metal cage inside or bending the PCB board affected the photodiode response. It turned out that there was some weak soldering of one of the inductors.
Now some pedestals, mirrors and lenses are left on the PSL table, since we are on the middle way to construct a PLL setup which employs two NPROs instead of use of PSL laser.
So Please Don't steal any of them.
Can I please get the network analyzer back?
Hartmut suggested a possible explanation for the way the electronics transfer function starts picking up at ~50MHz. He said that the 10KOhm resistance in series with the Test Input connector of the box might have some parasitic capacitance that at high frequency lowers the input impedance.
Although Hartmut also admitted that considering the high frequency at which the effect is observed, anything can be happening with the electronics inside of the box.
I upgraded the old REFL199 to the new REFL55.
To do that I had to replace the old photodiode inside, switching to a 2mm one.
Electronics and optical transfer functions, non normalized are shown in the attached plot.
The details about the modifications are contained in this dedicated wiki page (Upgrade_09 / RF System / Upgraded RF Photodiodes)
This evening we measured the noise spectrum of the reference cavity PD used in the FSS loop. From that we estimated the transimpedance and found that the PD is shot-noise limited. We also found a big AM oscillation in correspondence of the FSS modulation sideband which we later attenuated at least in part.
i just restarted the elog for the third time in the past 12 hours.
I checked the elog.log file to debug the problem. It doesn't contain eveidence of any particular cause, except for png/jpg file uploads happened last night.
I'm not sure we can blame Image Magic again because the last crash seems to be occurred just after an entry with e jpg picture was included in the body of the message. I think Image Magic is used only for previews of attachments like pdfs or ps.
Maybe we should totally disable image magic.
I was aware of a problem on those units since I acquired the data. Then it wasn't totally clear to me which were the units of the data as downloaded from the Agilent 4395A, and, in part, still isn't.
It's clear that the data was in units of spectrum, an not spectral density: in between the two there is a division by the bandwidth (100KHz, in this case). Correcting for that, one gets the following plot for the FSS PD:
Although the reason why I was hesitating to elog this other plot is that it looks like there's still a discrepancy of about 0.5dBm between what one reads on the display of the spectrum analyzer and the data values downloaded from it.
However I well know that, I should have just posted it, including my reserves about that possible offset (as I'm doing now).
These are the dark noise spectrum that I measured on the 11MHz and 55MHz PD prototypes I modified.
The plots take into account the 50Ohm input impedance of the spectrum analyzer (that is, the nosie is divided by 2).
With an estimated transimpedance of about 300Ohm, I would expect to have 2-3nV/rtHz at all frequencies except for the resonant frequencies of each PD. At those resonances I would expect to have ~15nV/rtHz (cfr elog entry 2760).
I have to figure out what are the sources of such noises.
There's several more of the this vintage in one of the last cabinets down the new Y-arm.
Hold on, did the arms get re-baptized?
After adding an inductor L=100uH and a resistor R=10Ohm in parallel after the OP547A opamp that provide the bias for the photodiode of REFL11, the noise at low frequency that I had observed, was significantly reduced.
See this plot:
A closer inspection of the should at 11MHz in the noise spectrum, showed some harmonics on it, spaced with about 200KHz. Closing the RF cage and the box lid made them disappear. See next plot:
The full noise spectrum looks like this:
A big bump is present at ~275MHz. it could important if it also shows up on the shot noise spectrum.
This morning the pencil soldering iron of our Weller WD2000M Soldering Station suddenly stopped working and got cold after I turned the station on. The unit's display is showing a message that says "TIP". i checked out the manual, but it doesn't say anything about that. I don't know what it means. Perhaps burned tip?
Before asking Steve to buy a new one, I emailed Weller about the problem.
This morning, at about 12 Koji found all the front-ends down.
At 1:45pm rebooted ISCEX, ISCEY, SOSVME, SUSVME1, SUSVME2, LSC, ASC, ISCAUX
Then I burtestored ISCEX, ISCEY, ISCAUX to April 2nd, 23:07.
The front-ends are now up and running again.
Lately I've been trying to sort out the problem of the discrepancy that I noticed between the values read on the spectrum analyzer's display and what we get with the GPIB interface.
It turns out that the discrepancy originates from the two data vector that the display and the GPIB interface acquire. Whereas the display shows data in "RAW" format, the GPIB interface, for the way the netgpibdata script is written, acquires the so called "error-corrected data". That is the GPIB downloaded data is postprocessed and corrected for some internal calibration factors of the instrument.
I noticed that someone, that wasn't me, has edited the wiki page about the netgpibdata under my name saying:
* A4395 Spectrum Units
Independetly by which unites are displayed by the A4395 spectrum analyzer on the screen, the data is saved in Watts/rtHz"
# gnd n22
# | |
# Rip Rw2
# | | |\
# nt- Rsi-n2- - - C2 - n3 - - - - | \
# | | | | |4106>-- n5 - Rs -- no
# iinput Rd L1 L2 R24 n6- | / | |
# |- nin- | | | | | |/ | Rload
# Cd n7 R22 gnd | | |
# | | | | - - - R8 - - gnd
# gnd R1 gnd R7
# | |
# gnd gnd
What??? I don't see any gray trace of Rs in the plot. What are you talking about?
Anyway, if you are true, the circuit is bad as the noise should only be dominated by the thermal noise of the resonant circuit.
From the measurements of the 11 MHz RFPD at 11Mhz I estimated a transimpedance of about 750 Ohms. (See attached plot.)
The fit shown in the plot is: Vn = Vdn + sqrt(2*e*Idc) ; Vn=noise; Vdn=darknoise; e=electron charge; Idc=dc photocurrent
The estimate from the fit is 3-4 times off from my analsys of the circuit and from any LISO simulation. Likely at RF the contributions of the parassitic components of each element make a big difference. I'm going to improve the LISO model to account for that.
The problem of the factor of 2 in the data turned out to be not a real one. Assuming that the dark noise at resonance is just Johnson's noise from the resonant circuit transimpedance underestimates the dark noise by 100%.
Putting my hands ahead, I know I could have taken more measurements around the 3dB point, but the 40m needs the PDs soon.
Something must be wrong.
1. Physical Unit is wrong for the second term of "Vn = Vdn + Sqrt(2 e Idc)"
2. Why does the fit go below the dark noise?
3. "Dark noise 4 +/- NaN nV/rtHz" I can not accept this fitting.
Also apparently the data points are not enough.
1) True. My bad. In my elog entry (but not in my fit code) I forgot the impedance Z= 750Ohm (as in the fit) of the resonant circuit in front of the square root: Vn = Vdn + Z * sqrt( 2 e Idc )
2) That is exactly the point I was raising! The measured dark noise at resonance is 2x what I expect.
I also admitted that the data points were few, especially around the 3dB point.
Today I'm going to repeat the measurement with a new setup that lets me tune the light intensity more finely.
I can't find the DELL laptop anywhere in the lab. Does anyone know where it is?
Also one of the two netbooks is missing.
All the details and data will be included in the wiki page (and so also the results for AS55). Here I just show the comparison of the transfer functions that I measured and that I modeled.
I applied an approximate calibration to the data so that all the measurements would refer to the transfer function of Vout / PD Photocurrent. Here's how they look like. (also the calibration will be explained in the wiki)
The ratio between the amplitude of the 55Mhz modulation over the 11MHz is ~ 90dB
The electronics TF doesn't provide a faithful reproduction of the optical response.
Here's another measurement of the noise of the REFL11 PD.
This time I made the fit constraining the Dark Noise. I realized that it didn't make much sense leaving it as a free coefficient: the dark noise is what it is.
Result: the transimpedance of REFL11at 11 MHz is about 4000 Ohm.
What kind of fit did you use? How are the uncertainties in the parameters obtained?
Would it be possible to write about the technique on a wiki page as you get measurements and results?
[Alberto, Koji, Rana]
The RFM network failed today. We had to reboot the frame builder anf restart all the front end following the instructions for the "Nuclear Option".
Burt-restoring to May 1st at 18:07, or April 30 18:07 made c1sosvme crash. We had to reset the front ends again and restore to April 15th at 18:07 in order to make everything work.
Everything seems fine again now.
Here's the (calibrated) transimpedance of the new REFL55 PD.
T(55.3) / T_(11.06) = 93 dB
After munching analytical models, simulations, measurements of photodiodes I think I got a better grasp of what we want from them, and how to get it. For instance I now know that we need a transimpedance of about 5000 V/A if we want them to be shot noise limited for ~mW of light power.
Adding 2-omega and f1/f2 notch filters complicates the issue, forcing to make trade-offs in the choice of the components (i.e., the Q of the notches)
Here's a better improved design of the 11Mhz PD.
This should be better. It should also have larger resonance width.
How much is the width?
The transfer function phase drops by 180 degrees in about 2MHz. Is that a good way to measure the width?
The measured transimpedance of the latest POY11 PD matches my model very well up to 100 MHz. But at about ~216MHz I have a resonance that I can't really explain.
The following is a simplified illustration of the resonant circuit:
Perhaps my model misses that resonance because it doesn't include stray capacitances.
While I was tinkering with it, i noticed a couple of things:
- the frequency of that oscillation changes by grasping with finger the last inductor of the circuit (the 55n above); that is adding inductance
- the RF probe of the scope clearly shows me the oscillation only after the 0.1u series capacitor
- adding a small capacitor in parallel to the feedback resistor of the output amplifier increases the frequency of the oscilaltion
I started putting together the components that are coint to go inside the frequency generation box. Here's how it looked like:
The single component are going to be mounted on a board that is going to sit on the bottom of the box.
I'm thinking whether to mount the components on an isolating board (like they did in GEO), or on an aluminum board.
I emailed Hartmut to know more details about his motivations on making that choice.