40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 63 of 344 Not logged in
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
11782   Wed Nov 18 17:09:22 2015 KojiSummaryPSLPMC Servo analysis

Summary

The PMC servo was analysed. OLTF was measured and modeled by ZPK (Attachment 1). The error and actuator signals were calibrated in m/rtHz (Attachment 2)

Measurement methods

OLTF:

- The PMC servo board does not have dedicated summing/monitor points for the OLTF measurement. Moreover the PZT HV output voltage is monitored with 1/49.6 attenuation.
Therefore we need a bit of consideration.

- The noise injection can be done at EXT DC.
- Quantity (A): Transfer function between HV OUT MON and MIX OUT MON with the injection.
We can measure the transfer function between the HV OUT (virtual) and the MIX OUT. (HV OUT->MIX OUT). In reality, HV OUT is attenuated by factor of 49.6.
i.e. A = (HV_OUT->MIX_OUT)*49.6
- Quantity (B): Transfer function between HV OUT MON and MIX OUT MON without the injection.

This is related to the transfer function between the MIX OUT and HV OUT. In reality, HV OUT is attenuated.
i.e. B = 1/((MIX_OUT->HV_OUT)/49.6)

- What we want to know is HV_OUT->MIX_OUT->HV_OUT. i.e. A/B = (HV_OUT->MIX_OUT*49.6)*((MIX_OUT->HV_OUT)/49.6) = HV_OUT->MIX_OUT->HV_OUT

PSD:

- The MIX OUT and HV OUT spectra have been measured. The MIX OUT was calibrated with the calibration factor in the previous entry. This is the inloop stability estimation.
From the calibrated MIX OUT and HV OUT, the free running stability of the cavity was estimated, by mutiplying with |1-OLTF| and |1-1/(1-OLTF)|, respectively, in order to recover
the free running motion.

OLTF Modeling

Here is the model function for the open loop TF. The first line comes from the circuit diagram. The overall factor was determined by eye-fit.
The second and third lines are to reproduce the peak/notch feature at 12kHz. The fourth line is to reproduce 28kHz feature.
The LPF right after the mixer was analyzed by a circuit simulation (Circuit Lab). It can be approximated as 150kHz LPF as the second pole
seems to come at 1.5MHz.

The sixth line comes from the LPF formed by the output resistance and the PZT capacitance.

The seventh line is to reproduce the limit by the GBW product of OP27. As the gain is 101 in one of the stages,
it yields the pole freq of ~80kHz. But it is not enough to explain the phase delay at low frequency. Therefore this
discrepancy was compensated by empirical LPF at 30kHz.

function cmpOLTFc = PMC_OLTF_model(freqOLTFc)

cmpOLTFc = -7e5*pole1(freqOLTFc,0.162).*zero1(freqOLTFc,491)... % from the circuit diagram     .*zero2(freqOLTFc,12.5e3,100)... % eye-fit     .*pole2(freqOLTFc,12.2e3,6)... % eye-fit     .*pole2(freqOLTFc,27.8e3, 12)... % eye-fit     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,150e3)... % Mixer LPF estimated from Circuit Lab Simulation     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,11.3)... % Output Impedance + PZT LPF     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,8e6/101)... % GBW OP27     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,3e4); % Unknown

end

Result

Attachment 1:

The nominal OLTF (Nov 17 data) shows the nominal UGF is ~1.7kHz and the phase margin of ~60deg.

The measured OLTF was compared with the modelled OLTF. In the end they show very sufficient agreement for further calibration.
The servo is about to be instable at 28kHz due to unknown series resonance. Later in the same day, the gain of the PMC loop had to be
reduced from 7dB to 3dB to mitigate servo oscillation. It is likely that this peak caused the oscillation. The notch frequency was measured
next day and it showed no sign of frequncy drift. That's good.

We still have some phase to reduce the high freq peaks by an LPF in order to increase the over all gain.

Attachment 2:

The red curve shows the residual floor displacement of 2~10x10-15 m/rtHz. Below 4Hz there is a big peak. I suspect that I forgot to close
the PSL shutter and the IMC was locked during the measurement. Then does this mean the measured noise corresponds to the residual laser
freq noise or the PMC cavity displacement? This is interesting to see.

The estimated free running motion from the error and actuation signals agrees very well. This ensures the precision of the caibration in the precious entries.

11792   Fri Nov 20 09:45:39 2015 steveSummarySUSoplev laser summary

Quote:

 Quote: May  13, 2014             ETMX,  .............laser in place 90 d       May  22, 2012             ETMY,       Oct.  7,  2013             ETMY,  LT  503 d  or  1.4 y............bad beam quality ?      Aug. 8,  2014              ETMY,  .............laser in place   425 days  or  1.2 y

Sept. 5, 2014              new 1103P, sn P893516  installed at SP table for aLIGO oplev use qualification

11793   Fri Nov 20 15:44:12 2015 KojiSummaryPSLAdded 17.5kHz LPF to the PMC servo

As a final tune of the PMC servo, I've added 1nF cap at the error signal amplification stage. The diagram has been updated and uploaded to DCC. https://dcc.ligo.org/D1400221

It should be noted that this modification yielded the error signal to have 17.5kHz roll off.

The openloop TF after the modification has been measured. (Attachment 1)

With the new nominal gain of 9dB, almost the same gain margin for the 28kHz peak has been realized.
=> We have 6dB (factor of 2) more gain at low frequency. Currently, the feature at 8kHz causes the oscillation when the gain is further increased.

Here is the model function for the OLTF.

function cmpOLTFc = PMC_OLTF_model(freqOLTFc)

cmpOLTFc = -9.5e5*pole1(freqOLTFc,0.162).*zero1(freqOLTFc,491)... % from the circuit diagram     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,17.5e3)... % Newly implemented input filter => GBW pole was replaced with this     .*zero2(freqOLTFc,12.5e3,100)... % eye-fit     .*pole2(freqOLTFc,12.2e3,6)... % eye-fit     .*pole2(freqOLTFc,28.8e3, 12)... % eye-fit     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,150e3)... % Mixer LPF estimated from Circuit Lab Simulation     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,11.3)... % Output Impedance + PZT LPF     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,3e4); % Unknown    end

The free-running round-trip displacement (roundtrip) / frequency noise is shown in Attachments. There we compare the spectra with and without IMC locked.

i.e. When the IMC is not locked, we are measuring the laser frequency noise with the sensor (PMC cavity) that is noisy due to the PMC displacement.
When the IMC is locked, the laser frequency is further stabilized while the sensor (PMC) noise is not changed.

- Without IMC locked

Can we see the laser freq noise? It seems that it is visible above 100Hz.
The red curve is the measured noise level. The NPRO (although it is LWE NPRO) noise level from S. Nagano's thesis (see our wiki) is shown there.

- With IMC locked

When the IC is locked, we see the increase of the noise between 1~4Hz. It means that the IMC is not only noisier than the laser, but also noisier than the PMC cavity.
Sounds reasonable. And the PMC is capable to handle this motion.

The reduction of the frequency noise is seen from 100Hz to 30kHz.

The interesting point is that we can see the noise increase above 30kHz when the IMC is locked.
I believe that the phase correction EOM is shared with the PMC modulation. i.e. PMC sees the corrected laser frequency.

We expect that the frequency noise is reduced at this frequency. But in reality not.

In addition, there is a sharp peak at ~35kHz. I wonder If this is caused by the IMC servo. It is worse to investigate.

11818   Fri Nov 27 03:38:23 2015 yutaroSummaryLSCround trip loss of Y arm

Tonight I measured "loss map" of ETMY. The method to calculate round trip loss is same as written in elog 11810, except that I used POYDC instead of ASDC this time.

How I changed beam spot on ETMY is: elog 11779.

I measured round trip loss for 5 x 5 points. The result is below.

(unit: ppm)

494.9 +/- 7.6       356.8 +/- 6.0       253.9 +/- 7.9       250.3 +/- 8.2       290.6 +/- 5.1
215.7 +/- 4.8       225.6 +/- 5.7       235.1 +/- 7.0       284.4 +/- 5.4       294.7 +/- 4.5
205.2 +/- 6.0       227.9 +/- 5.8       229.4 +/- 7.2       280.5 +/- 6.3       320.9 +/- 4.3
227.9 +/- 5.7       230.5 +/- 5.5       262.1 +/- 5.9       315.3 +/- 4.7       346.8 +/- 4.2
239.7 +/- 4.5       260.7 +/- 5.3       281.2 +/- 5.8       333.7 +/- 5.0       373.8 +/- 4.9

The correspondence between the loss shown above and the beam spot on ETMY is shown in the following figure. In the figure, "downward" and "left" indicate direction of shift of the beam spot when you watch it via the camera (ex. 494.9 ppm corresponds to the lowest and rightest point).

Edited below on 28th Nov.

To shift the beam spot on ETMY, I added offset in YARM dither loop. The offset was [-30,-15,0,15,30]x[-10,-5,0,5,10] for pitch and yaw, respectively.  How I calibrated the beam spot is basically based on elog 11779, but I multiplied 5.3922 for vertical direction and 4.6205 for horizontal direction which I had obtained by caliblation of oplev (elog 11785).

Edited above on 28 th Nov.

I will report the detail later.

11857   Mon Dec 7 11:11:25 2015 yutaroSummaryLSCround trip loss of X arm

On the day before yesterday and in this morning, I measured loss map of ETMX. I reported the method I used to change the beam spot on ETMX below.

Round trip loss was measured for 5 x 5 points. The result is below.

(unit: ppm)

455.4 +/- 21.1       437.1 +/- 21.8       482.3 +/- 21.8       461.6 +/- 22.5       507.9 +/- 20.1
448.4 +/- 20.7       457.3 +/- 21.2       495.6 +/- 20.2       483.1 +/- 20.8       472.2 +/- 19.8
436.9 +/- 19.3       444.6 +/- 19.7       483.0 +/- 19.5       474.9 +/- 20.9       498.3 +/- 18.7
454.4 +/- 18.7       474.4 +/- 20.6       487.7 +/- 21.4       482.6 +/- 20.7       487.0 +/- 19.9
443.7 +/- 18.6       469.9 +/- 20.2       482.8 +/- 18.7       480.9 +/- 19.5       486.1 +/- 19.2

The correspondence between the loss shown above and the beam spot on ETMX is shown in the attached figure. In the figure, "up" and "right" indicate direction of shift of the beam spot when you watch it via the camera (ex. 455.4 ppm corresponds to the highest and rightest point in the view via the camera).

This result is consistent withe previous result of 561.19 +/- 14.57 ppm ericq got with ASDC and reported in elog 10248 if the discussion I reported in 11819 is taken into account. Elog 11819 says in short that the strange behavior of ASDC could give us 60-70 ppm error.

The reason why the error is larger than that of the measurement for ETMY is that the noise of POX is larger than that of POY. But I am not sure to what extent the statistical error needs to be reduced.

How I shifted the beam spot on ETMX:

Basically, the method was same as one used for Y arm. Different point is: for Y arm we have two steering mirrors TT1&2, but for X arm we have only one steering mirror BS. Then in order to shift incident beam so that the beam spot on ITMX does not change, I ran the dithering of X arm as well as that of Y arm and added offsets to both dither loops that caused same amount of shift on ETMX and ETMX. Thanks to the symmetry between X arm and Y arm, the dithering of Y arm ensured that the beam spot on ITMX was unchanged as well as that of ITMY. The idea of this method is schematically shown in Attachment 2.

The calibration of how much the beam spot shifted is based on the results of elog 11846 . The offset was [-15,-7.5,0,7.5,15]x[-5,-2.5,0,2.5,5] for pitch and yaw, respectively.

11861   Tue Dec 8 11:24:45 2015 yutaroSummaryComputer Scripts / ProgramsScripts for loss map measurement

Here I explain usage of my scripts for loss map measurement. There are 7 script files in a same directory /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/lossmap_scripts. With these scripts, round trip loss of an arm cavity with the beam spot on one mirror shifted to 5x5 (option: 3x3) points is measured. You can choose on which cavity you measure, the beam spot on which mirror you shift, and maximum shift of the beam spot in vertical and horizontal direction.

To start measurement from the beginning

Run the following command in an arbitrary directory and you will get several text files including the result of loss map measurement:

> python /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/lossmap_scripts/lossmap.py [maximum shift in mm (PIT)] [maximum shift in mm (YAW)] [arm name (XorY)] [mirror name (E or I)]

Optionally, you can add "AUTO" at the end of the above command. Without "AUTO", you will be asked if the dithering has already settled down or not after each shift of the beam spot and you can let the scripts wait until the dithering settles down sufficiently. If you add "AUTO", it will be judged if the dithering has settled down or not according to some criteria, and the measurement will continue without your response to the terminal.

The files to be created in the current directory by the scripts are:

- lossmapETMX1-1.txt                                # [POX power (locked)] / [POX power (misaligned)]

- lossmapETMX1-2.txt                                # standard deviation of [POX power (locked)] / [POX power (misaligned)]

- lossmapETMX1-3.txt                                # TRX

- lossmapETMX1-1_converted.txt               # round trip loss (ppm) calculated from lossmapETMX1-1.txt

- lossmapETMX1-1_converted_sigma.txt     # standard deviation of round trip loss calculated from 1-1.txt and 1-2.txt

- lossmapETMX_result.txt                           # round trip loss and its error in a clear form.

The name of the files would be "lossmapITMY1-1.txt" etc. depending on which mirror you have chosen.

To restart measurement from a certain point

Run the following command in a directory containing "lossmap(mirror name)1-1.txt", "lossmap(mirror name)1-2.txt" and "lossmap(mirrorname)1-3.txt" which are created by previous not-completed measurement:

> python /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/lossmap_scripts/lossmap.py [maximum shift in mm (PIT)] [maximum shift in mm (YAW)] [arm name (XorY)] [mirror name (E or I)] [restart point (PIT)] [restart point (YAW)]​

You can also add "AUTO".

How to designate the restart point:

Matrix elements of output of this measurement procedure are characterized by a pair of two numbers as the following shows.

(-1,-1) ->  (-1,-0.5) ->  (-1,0) ->   (-1,0.5)  ->   (-1,1)
v
(-0.5,1) <- (-0.5,0.5) <- (-0.5,0) <- (-0.5,-0.5) <- (0.5,-1)
v
(0,-1) ->   (0,-0.5)  ->  (0,0)  ->   (0,0.5)  ->    (0,1)
v
(0.5,1)  <- (0.5,0.5)  <- (0.5,0)  <- (0.5,-0.5)  <- (0.5,-1)
v
(1,-1) ->   (1,-0.5) ->   (1,0)  ->   (1,0.5)   ->   (1,1)

Please write the numbers that correspond to the matrix element you want to restart at. Arrows show the order of sequence of measurement. About the correspondence between the matrix elements and real position on the ETMY and ETMX, see elog 11818 and 11857, respectively.

This script will overwrite the files (~1-1.txt etc.) so it is safer to make backup of the files before you run this script.

Some notes on the scripts and measurement

- Calibration has been done only for ETMs, i.e. for ITMs unit of [maximum shift] is not mm, but the values written in [maximum shift] equal to the maximum offsets added just after demodulation of ASS loop (ex. C1:ASS-YARM_ITM_PIT_L_DEMOD_I_OFFSET).

- It should be checked before doing measurement if the following parameters are correct or not.

POXzero (L47 in lossmapx.py and L52 in lossmapx_resume.py: the value of C1:LSC-POXDC_OUTPUT when no light injects into POXPD.)

POYzero (L45 in lossmapy.py and L50 in lossmapy_resume.py: the value of C1:LSC-POYDC_OUTPUT when no light injects into POYPD.)

mmr (L11 in lossmap_convert.py: (mode matching carrier power)/(total power))

Tf (L12 in lossmap_convert.py; transmittivity of ITM)

Tetm (L13 in lossmap_convert.py: transmittivity of ETM in ppm)

- Changing n (L50 in lossmap.py) from 5 to 3, the grid points will be 3x3 changed from the default value of 5x5. If 3x3, the matrix elements are characterized by

(-1,-1) -> (-1,0) -> (-1,1)
v
(0,1)  <-  (0,0) <-  (0,-1)
v
(1,-1) ->  (1,0) ->  (1,1)

similarly to the case of 5x5.

- You can copy the directory lossmap_scripts anywhere in controls and use it. These scripts will work as long as all the 7 scripts exist in a same directory.

11864   Tue Dec 8 15:57:16 2015 yutaroSummaryLSCPower recycling gain estimation from arm loss measurement

I estimated power recycling gain with the results of arm loss measurement.

From elog 11818 and 11857, round trip losses including transmittivity of ETM of Y arm and X arm (let us call them $T_\mathrm{loss,Y}$ and $T_\mathrm{loss,X}$) are 229+13.7=243 ppm and 483+13.7=495 ppm, respectively.

How I calculated:

I used the following formula.

Amplitude reflectivity of an arm cavity $r_\mathrm{FP}$

$r_\mathrm{FP}=\sqrt{1-\frac{4T_\mathrm{ITM}T_\mathrm{loss}}{T^2_\mathrm{tot}}}$   (see elog 11816)

Amplitude reflectivity of FPMI $r_\mathrm{FPMI}$

$r_\mathrm{FPMI}=\frac{1}{2}(r_\mathrm{FP,X}+r_\mathrm{FP,Y})$

With power transmittivity of PRM $T_\mathrm{PRM}$ and amplitude reflectivity of PRM $r_\mathrm{PRM}$, power recycling gain is

$\mathrm{PRG}=\frac{T_\mathrm{PRM}}{(1-r_\mathrm{PRM}r_\mathrm{FPMI})^2}$.

I assumed $T_\mathrm{ITM}\simeq T_\mathrm{tot}=\frac{2\pi}{401}=0.01566$$T_\mathrm{PRM}=0.05637$, and $r_\mathrm{PRM}=\sqrt{1-T_\mathrm{PRM}}$, and then I got

PRG = 9.8.

Since both round trip losses have relative error of ~ 4 % and PRG is proportional to inverse square of $T_\mathrm{loss}$ up to the leading order of it, relative error of PRG can be estimated as ~ 8 %, so PRG = 9.8 +/- 0.8

Discussion

According to elog 11691, which says TRX and TRY level was ~125 when DRFPMI was locked, power recycling gain was $\mathrm{PRG}=125\times T_\mathrm{PRM}=7.0$ at the last DRFPMI lock.

Measured PRG is lower than PRG estimated here, but it is natural because various causes such as mode mismatch between PRC mode and arm cavity mode, imperfect contrast of FPMI, and so on could decrease PRG, which Eric suggested to me.

Added on Dec 9

If $T_\mathrm{loss,X}$ were as small as $T_\mathrm{loss,Y}$, PRG would be 16.0. PRC would be still under coupled.

11867   Wed Dec 9 18:45:58 2015 KojiSummaryGeneralNetwork Topology Check

[Eric Q, Gautam, Koji]

We went through the network connections to produce the mapping of the instruments.
Gautam summarized the notes into a spread sheet. See attachments.

We didn't find any irregular connections except for the connection of NETMGR port of c1ioo to Martian Network.
This cable was removed.

11876   Fri Dec 11 23:12:09 2015 KojiSummaryCOCLoss map measurement document

Yutaro left detailed slides for his loss map measurement

https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-G1501547

11900   Wed Dec 23 15:43:02 2015 ranaSummaryPSLPMC FSS IMC RF summing box

The EOM upstream of the PMC is used as the phase corrector for the FSS/IMC servo. It is also used to apply the 35.5 MHz PDH RF sidebands for the PMC locking. There is a Pomona box which is used to merge the two signals onto a single cable for the EOM.

Does this circuit make sense to anyone?

12000   Fri Feb 19 15:12:38 2016 KojiSummaryPEMGuralp Health Check

I measured the guralp raw outputs and the TFs using the handheld unit and an FFT analyzer.

[Setup]

The handheld unit was connected to each guralp with the same cable which is confirmed t be functional with the Yend Guralp.

The signal for Z, N, and E directions are obtained from the banana connectors on the handheld unit. Each direction has mass, low gain velocity, and high gain velocity output. The PSDs of the signals were measured with an FFT analyzer. The transfer function from the mass signal to the low/high gain signals were also measured for each direction.

The adjustment screw for the E output of the Xend does not work. I had to tilt the Xend Guralp using the leg screws to bring the E signal to zero.

[Result]

Attachment 1: Raw voltage PSD for all outputs
Attachment 2: Comparison of the low gain vel outputs

- All of the mass output show similar PSDs.
- Low gain velocity outputs shows somewhat similar levels. I still need to check if the output is really the ground velocity or not.
- High gain velocity outputs are either not high gain, broken, or not implemented.

- We need to calibrate the low gain output using signal injection, huddle test, or something else.

Attachment 3: TFs between each mass output and the low or high gain outputs

- TFs between the mass signal and the low vel signals show the similar transfer functions between the channels.
- The high gain outputs show low or no transfer function with regard to the mass signals.

12032   Sat Mar 12 22:23:37 2016 ranaSummaryIOOPMC relocked

Found it locked on TEM01 mode.

Sweets in the fridge for non-PhD holders, courtesy of the highest levels of Caltech.

12044   Wed Mar 23 15:23:12 2016 SteveSummaryPEMGuralps as connected

We have one calibration sheet of GUR- B, from 26 June 2008,    model CMG-T40-0008,  sn T4157       at  ETMY  east,  interface box input 1

I'm looking for calibration paper of GUR- A,                                model CMG-T40-0053,  sn T4Q17      at ETMX   south, interface box input 2

 Quote: I measured the guralp raw outputs and the TFs using the handheld unit and an FFT analyzer. [Setup] The handheld unit was connected to each guralp with the same cable which is confirmed t be functional with the Yend Guralp. The signal for Z, N, and E directions are obtained from the banana connectors on the handheld unit. Each direction has mass, low gain velocity, and high gain velocity output. The PSDs of the signals were measured with an FFT analyzer. The transfer function from the mass signal to the low/high gain signals were also measured for each direction. The adjustment screw for the E output of the Xend does not work. I had to tilt the Xend Guralp using the leg screws to bring the E signal to zero. [Result] Attachment 1: Raw voltage PSD for all outputs Attachment 2: Comparison of the low gain vel outputs - All of the mass output show similar PSDs. - Low gain velocity outputs shows somewhat similar levels. I still need to check if the output is really the ground velocity or not. - High gain velocity outputs are either not high gain, broken, or not implemented. - We need to calibrate the low gain output using signal injection, huddle test, or something else. Attachment 3: TFs between each mass output and the low or high gain outputs - TFs between the mass signal and the low vel signals show the similar transfer functions between the channels. - The high gain outputs show low or no transfer function with regard to the mass signals.

12093   Wed Apr 27 14:06:31 2016 ranaSummaryGeneralmeeting notes
1. Gautam will get help from Johannes and finish EX table by Monday.
2. Steve will spend a day this week with Johannes on Green Monster bakeout.
3. Q to analyzed green PDH servo and design demod low pass. Should we use the double LC notches to notch the 2f product? What's the demod filter attenuation requirement?
4. Koji will make a drawing of the ruby suspension standoff prism and post into the elog so that Steve can get some quotes next week.
5. Rana to implement 40m configuration in FOGprime17 and analyze RoC matching of ETMs. Get Antonio's help to analyzed SRC stability. Maybe use PyKat and Finesse since Antonio knows that stuff.
6. Give OCXO boxes to WB refcav people. Rana get Rich to make another couple of boxes for 40m PMC, FSS, IMC.
7. Rana/Koji get EKG to make specs and procure some new folding mirrors for the PRC/SRC. Make them a bit concave and dichroic.
12102   Mon May 2 17:06:58 2016 ranaSummaryCOCG&H optics to Fullerton/HWS for anneal testing

Steve sent 4 of our 1" diameter G&H HR mirrors to Josh Smith at Fullerton for scatter testing. Attached photo is our total stock before sending.

12125   Mon May 23 10:55:49 2016 steveSummarySUSITMX oplev laser replaced

May 23, 2016             ITMX dead He/Ne laser sn P845648 replaced after 1062 days [2.9 yrs] by 1103P, sn P859884, with output  2.6 mW, nicely round beam quality at 15 meters.

Power just before viewport 1 mW,  returning light on qpd 154 microW =  7,500 counts

12126   Mon May 23 15:51:32 2016 steveSummarySUSoplev laser summary updated

Quote:

Quote:

 Quote: 2005              ALL oplev servos use Coherent DIODE LASERS # 31-0425-000, 670 nm, 1 mW     Sep. 28, 2006              optical lever noise budget with DC readout in 40m,  LIGO- T060234-00-R, Reinecke & Rana     May  22, 2007              BS, SRM & PRM  He Ne 1103P takes over from diode     May  29, 2007              low RIN He Ne JDSU 1103P selected, 5 purchased sn: T8078254, T8078256, T8078257, T8078258 & T8077178 in Sep. 2007     Nov  30, 2007               Uniphase 1103P divergence measured     Nov. 30, 2007               ETMX old Uniphase 1103P  from 2002 dies: .............., running time not known......~3-5 years?     May 19, 2008               ETMY old Uniphase 1103P from 1999 dies;.....................running time not known.....~    ?     Oct.  2, 2008                ITMX & ITMY are still diodes, meaning others are converted to 1103P earlier                        JDSU 1103P were replaced as follows:    May 11, 2011                ETMX replaced, life time 1,258 days  or 3.4 years    May 13, 2014               ETMX , LT 1,098 days or 3 y    May 22, 2012               ETMY,  LT 1,464 days or  4 y    Oct.  5, 2011                BS & PRM, LT 4 years,  laser in place at 1,037 days or 2.8 y    Sep. 13, 2011               ITMY  old 1103P &    SRM    diode laser replaced by 1125P  ..........old He life time is not known, 1125P in place 1,059 days or 2.9 y    June 26, 2013              ITMX 622 days or 1.7 y    note: we changed because of beam quality.........................laser in place 420 days or 1.2 y     Sep. 27, 2013               purchased 3 JDSU 1103P lasers, sn: P893516, P893518, P893519 ......2 spares ( also 2 spares of 1125P of 5 mW & larger body )

May  13, 2014             ETMX,  .............laser in place 90 d

May  22, 2012             ETMY,

Oct.  7,  2013             ETMY,  LT  503 d  or  1.4 y............bad beam quality ?

Aug. 8,  2014              ETMY,  .............laser in place   425 days  or  1.2 y

Sept. 5, 2014              new 1103P, sn P893516  installed at SP table for aLIGO oplev use qualification

May 23, 2016             ITMX dead laser sn P845648 replaced after 1062 days [2.9 yrs] by 1103P, sn P859884, with output output  2.6 mW, nicely round beam quality at 15 meters.

12128   Tue May 24 10:21:36 2016 ericqSummarySUSITMX Oplev loops

I did a quick measurement of the ITMX oplev loops, both pitch and yaw have about the same upper UGF as previous measurements with the previous laser; about 4 Hz.

12175   Tue Jun 14 11:29:25 2016 JohannesSummaryASCYArm OpLev Calibration

In preparation for the armloss map I checked the calibration of the Y-Arm ITM and ETM OpLevs with the method originally described in https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8081/40m/1247. I was getting a little confused about the math though, so I attached a document at the end of this post in which I work it out for myself and posteriority. Stepping through an introduced offset in the control filter for the corresponding degree of freedom, I recorded the change in transmitted power and the reading of the OpLev channel with the current calibration. One thing I noticed is that the calibration for ITM PIT is inverted with respect to the others. This can of course be compensated at any point in any readout/feedback chain, but it might be nice to establish some sort of convention where positive feedback to the mirror will increase the OpLev reading.

The calibration factors I get are within ~10% of the currently stored values. The table (still incomplete, need to relate to the current values) summarizes the results:

Mirror DoF Current Relative New
Y-Arm OpLev Calibration
ETM PIT   0.974 ± 0.029
YAW   1.077 ± 0.021
ITM PIT   -0.972 ± 0.020
YAW   0.920 ± 0.048

The individual graphs:

## ITM YAW

The math:

12223   Tue Jun 28 20:43:23 2016 KojiSummaryCOCFirst Contact cleaning practice

Made a dry run of the in-situ cleaning for a 3inch optic.

Attachment 1: The Al dummy mass is clamped in the suspension cage.
Attachment 2: The front surface was painted. The nominal brush with the FC bottle was used.
Attachment 3: Zoom in of the front surface.
Attachment 4: The back surface was painted.
Attachment 5: The back surface was peeled.
Attachment 6: The front surface was peeled too.
Attachment 7: The peeled layers.

Findings:

1. To paint a thick layer (particlarly on the rim) is the key to peel it nicely.

2. It was helpful for easier peeling to have mutiple peek tabs. Two tabs were sufficient for ~1" circle.

3. The nominal brush with the bottle was OK although one has to apply the liquid many times to cover such a large area. A larger brush may cause dripping.

4. The nominal brush was sufficiently long once the OSEMs are removed. In any case it is better to remove the OSEMs.

12239   Fri Jul 1 17:51:28 2016 PrafulSummaryElectronicsReplacing DIMM on Optimus

There has been an ongoing memory error in optimus with the following messages:

controls@optimus|~ >
Message from syslogd@optimus at Jun 30 14:57:48 ...
kernel:[1292439.705127] [Hardware Error]: Corrected error, no action required.

Message from syslogd@optimus at Jun 30 14:57:48 ...
kernel:[1292439.705174] [Hardware Error]: CPU:24 (10:4:2) MC4_STATUS[Over|CE|MiscV|-|AddrV|CECC]: 0xdc04410032080a13

Message from syslogd@optimus at Jun 30 14:57:48 ...

Message from syslogd@optimus at Jun 30 14:57:48 ...
kernel:[1292439.705264] [Hardware Error]: MC4 Error (node 6): DRAM ECC error detected on the NB.

Message from syslogd@optimus at Jun 30 14:57:48 ...
kernel:[1292439.705323] [Hardware Error]: cache level: L3/GEN, mem/io: MEM, mem-tx: RD, part-proc: RES (no timeout)

Optimus is a Sun Fire X4600 M2 Split-Plane server. Based on this message, the issue seems to be in memory controller (MC) 6, chip set row (csrow) 7, channel 0. I got this same result again after installing edac-utils and running edac-util -v, which gave me:

mc6: csrow7: mc#6csrow#7channel#0: 287 Corrected Errors

and said that all other DIMMs were working fine with 0 errors. Each MC has 4 csrows numbered 4-7. I shut off optimus and checked inside and found that it consists of 8 CPU slots lined up horizontally, each with 4 DIMMs stacked vertically and 4 empty DIMM slots beneath. I'm thinking that each of the 8 CPU slots has its own memory controller (0-7) and that the csrow corresponds to the position in the vertical stack, with csrow 7 being the topmost DIMM in the stack. This would mean that MC 6, csrow 7 would be the 7th memory controller, topmost DIMM. The channel would then correspond to which one of the DIMMs in the pair is faulty although if the DIMM was replaced, both channels 0 and 1 would be switched out. Here are some sources that I used:

http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19121-01/sf.x4600/819-4342-18/html/z40007f01291423.html#i1287456

http://martinstumpf.com/how-to-diagnose-memory-errors-on-amd-x86_64-using-edac/

I'll find the exact part needed to replace soon.

12306   Fri Jul 15 17:44:37 2016 AakashSummaryGeneralAcromag Setup | SURF2016

Aidan has described the physical connections and initial setup here :  https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:30889/ATFWiki/doku.php?id=main:resources:computing:acromag#recovering_from_a_terminal_power_communication_outage  .

Since I used a Raspberry Pi(domenica.martian) for communicating to Acromag(acroey.martian) card, I had to recompile everything for linux-arm architecture.

For EPICS installation, download the EPICS base from http://www.aps.anl.gov/epics/download/base/baseR3.14.12.3.tar.gz . Installing dependencies, build, install epics at /usr/local/epics. By downloading modbusApp source from https://llocds.ligo-la.caltech.edu/daq/software/source/epics-3.14.12.2_long-source.tar.gz  , build the modbusApp for linux-arm architecture in modules/modbus directory inside epics base.

Put all the files mentioned by Aidan and run a tmux session to grab channels.

Also, pyModbus can be used to read the channels. I'll put the physical connections schematic shortly.

12337   Tue Jul 26 14:24:38 2016 KojiSummaryVACPurge compressed air system at LHO

I've visited the purge clean air system at LHO Yarm mid-station with John Worden.

The system is described C981637. There is a schematic in C981637-06-V (Vol.6).pdf although the schematic has some differences (or uncorrected mistakes).

This system is intended to provide positive pressure when a soft cover is attached to a chamber door. When the door is open, the purging does not help to keep the chamber clean because the flow is too slow. This protection has to be done with overhead HEPA filters (22x5000cfm). It may be possible that this purge air helps the tube not to allow dusts to come in. But before using this, the chambers and the tubes have to be cleaned, according to John.

- Here at the site, the purge air system is started up a day before the vent. This system is used for the vent air, the purge air, and turbo foreline filling.

- Air intake (attachment 1): At the site, the air is intaken from the VEA. We want to incorporate somewhat clean air instead of dirty, dusty, outside air.

- Initial filter (attachment 2): a high volume filter before the compressors.

- The compressors (attachment 3, 4) are 5x 6 horse power air compressor each goes up to 160 psi. They are turned on and off depending on the demand of the air. Which is turned on is revolved by the controller to equalize the compressor usage hours.

- The compressed air goes through the air cooler (heat exchanger) to remove the heat by the compressor work.

- This air goes through prefilters and accumulated in the air receiver (100psi) (attachment 5). This receiver tank has an automated vent valve for periodical water drainage at the bottom.

- The accumulated air is discharged to twin drier towers (attachment 6, blue). The tower is operated by the controller (attachment 7) alternately with a period of 4min (or 10min by setting). When one of the towers is working, a humid air comes from the bottom and the dry air is discharged from the top. A part of the dry air goes into the other tower from the top to the bottom and dries the tower. There is a vent at the bottom to discharge water periodically.

- The dried air goes through 4 types of filters. After the last filter, all of the plumbing should be made of stainless steel to keep cleanliness.

- The air goes to the pressure reducing regulator (attachment 8, gray). The final flow speed at the chamber side is 50cfm max, according to John.

- The lower pressure air goes through the final filter (attachment 8, blue). As the pressure is low, this filter is big in order to keep the volume of the air flow.

- The purge air is supplied to the chamber side with KF50 (attachment 9). There is a vent valve (attachment 10) for safety and also to run a dry air for at least a day before the use to clean up the supply line. The purge line is disconnected when no in use.

- The entire system (attachment 11) and size comparison (attachment 12).

12338   Tue Jul 26 16:01:32 2016 SteveSummaryVACPurge compressed air system

Thanks for checking this out Koji

The builder in 1996 was Process System International, Inc ( Westborough, MA ) It does not exist any longer or I just could not find them. Flow diagramm at Atm1

Should I be keep looking for a company who could quote us for building a similar smaller unit with 10 - 15 cfm flowrate?

Note: my intension with the two mobile-overhead HEPA filter was the same as John Worden's " clean air overpressured tent " at chamber entrance.

Atm2, Our unit has 650 cfm, velocity 90 fpm at resistance 0.5"    It may be enough to give a little overpressure if we seal it well to the chamber

We use to use them to minimize dirt getting inside the chanbers.

12339   Tue Jul 26 17:41:59 2016 KojiSummaryVACPurge compressed air system

We have no number for the CFM without calculation. We can't assume a random number like 10-15

12341   Wed Jul 27 11:40:48 2016 steveSummarySUSoplev laser summary updated

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

 Quote: 2005              ALL oplev servos use Coherent DIODE LASERS # 31-0425-000, 670 nm, 1 mW     Sep. 28, 2006              optical lever noise budget with DC readout in 40m,  LIGO- T060234-00-R, Reinecke & Rana     May  22, 2007              BS, SRM & PRM  He Ne 1103P takes over from diode     May  29, 2007              low RIN He Ne JDSU 1103P selected, 5 purchased sn: T8078254, T8078256, T8078257, T8078258 & T8077178 in Sep. 2007     Nov  30, 2007               Uniphase 1103P divergence measured     Nov. 30, 2007               ETMX old Uniphase 1103P  from 2002 dies: .............., running time not known......~3-5 years?     May 19, 2008               ETMY old Uniphase 1103P from 1999 dies;.....................running time not known.....~    ?     Oct.  2, 2008                ITMX & ITMY are still diodes, meaning others are converted to 1103P earlier                        JDSU 1103P were replaced as follows:    May 11, 2011                ETMX replaced, life time 1,258 days  or 3.4 years    May 13, 2014               ETMX , LT 1,098 days or 3 y    May 22, 2012               ETMY,  LT 1,464 days or  4 y    Oct.  5, 2011                BS & PRM, LT 4 years,  laser in place at 1,037 days or 2.8 y    Sep. 13, 2011               ITMY  old 1103P &    SRM    diode laser replaced by 1125P  ..........old He life time is not known, 1125P in place 1,059 days or 2.9 y    June 26, 2013              ITMX 622 days or 1.7 y    note: we changed because of beam quality.........................laser in place 420 days or 1.2 y     Sep. 27, 2013               purchased 3 JDSU 1103P lasers, sn: P893516, P893518, P893519 ......2 spares ( also 2 spares of 1125P of 5 mW & larger body )

May  13, 2014             ETMX,  .............laser in place 90 d

May  22, 2012             ETMY,

Oct.  7,  2013             ETMY,  LT  503 d  or  1.4 y............bad beam quality ?

Aug. 8,  2014              ETMY,  .............laser in place   425 days  or  1.2 y

Sept. 5, 2014              new 1103P, sn P893516  installed at SP table for aLIGO oplev use qualification

May 23, 2016             ITMX dead laser sn P845648 replaced after 1062 days [2.9 yrs] by 1103P, sn P859884, with output output  2.6 mW, nicely round beam quality at 15 meters.

July 27, 2016             2  new 1103P from Edmonds in: P947034 & P947039, manf. date April 2016,

12352   Fri Jul 29 03:44:04 2016 AakashSummary About Acromag | SURF 2016

I tried to recompile the modbusApp binary for linux-arm acrhitecture since I suspected someting wrong with it. But still the problem persists; I can connect to acromag but cannot access the channels. I have also reconfigured new acromag bus works terminal XT 1221-000 and I want to test if I could access its channels. My target is to complete this acromag setup work before sunday morning so that I can focus towards having some useful results for my presentation.

12365   Wed Aug 3 14:52:37 2016 SteveSummaryPEMGuralps as connected

Guralps as connected with pictures

12534   Wed Oct 5 19:43:13 2016 gautamSummaryGeneralVent review

This elog is meant to review some of the important changes made during the vent this summer - please add to this if I've forgotten something important. I will be adding this to the wiki page for a more permanent record shortly.

Vent objectives:

1. Clean ITMX, ITMY, ETMX, ETMY
2. Replace ETMX suspension cage, replace Al wire standoffs with Ruby (sapphire?) standoffs.
3. Shorten Y arm length by 20mm
4. Replace 40mm aperture baffles in ETM chambers with 50mm black glass baffles

Optics, OSEM and suspension status:

ITMX & ITMY

• ITMX and ITMY did not have any magnets broken off during the vent - all five OSEM coils for both were removed and the optic EQ stopped for F.C. cleaning.
• Both HR and AR faces were F.Ced, ~20mm dia area cleaned.
• The coils were re-inserted in an orientation as close to the original (as judged from photos), and the shadow sensor outputs were made as close to half their open values as possible, although in the process of aligning the arms, this may have changed
• OSEM filter existense was checked (to be updated)
• Shadow sensor open values were recorded (to be updated)
• Checked that tables were level before closing up
• The UL OSEM on ITMY was swapped for a short OSEM while investigating glitchy shadow sensor outputs. This made no difference. However, the original OSEM wasn't replaced. Short OSEM was used as we only had spare short OSEMs. Serial number (S/N 228) and open voltage value have been recorded, wiki page will be updated. Does this have something to do with the input matrix diagonalization weirdness we have been seeing recently?
• ITMX seems to be prone to getting stuck recently, reason unknown although I did notice the LL OSEM was kind of close to the magnet while inserting (but this magnet is not the one getting stuck, as we can see this clearly on the camera - the prime suspect is UL I believe)
• OL beam centering on in vacuum steering optics checked before closing up

ETMY

• UL, UR and LR magents broke off at various points, and so have been reglued
• No standoff replacement was done
• Re-suspension was done using newly arrived SOS wire
• Original OSEMs were inserted, orientations have changed somewhat from their previous configuration as we did considerable experimentation with the B-R peak minimization for this optic
• OSEM filter status, shadow sensor open voltage values to be updated.
• New wire suspension clamp made at machine shop is used, 5 in lb of torque used to tighten the clamp
• HR face cleaned with F.C.
• Optic + suspension towers air baked (separately) at 34C for curing of EP30
• Checked that tables were level before closing up
• 40mm O.D. black glass baffle replaced with 50mm O.D. baffle.
• Suspension cage was moved towards ITMY by 19mm (measured using a metal spacer) by sliding along stop marking the position of the tower.

ETMX

• Al wire standoffs <--> Ruby wire standoffs (this has changed the pitch frequency)
• All magnets were knocked off at some point, but were successfully reglued
• New SOS tower, new SOS wire, new wire clamp used
• OSEM filter status, shadow sensor open voltage values to be updated.
• OSEM orientation is close to horizontal for all 5 OSEMs
• Table leveling was checked before closing up.
• 40mm O.D. black glass baffle replaced with 50mm O.D. baffle.\

PRM

• Some issues with the OSEMs were noticed, and were traced down to the Al foil caps covering the back of the (short) OSEMs, which are there to minimize the scattererd 1064nm light interfering with the shadow sensor, shorting one of the OSEMs
• To mitigate this, all Al foil caps now have a thin piece of Kapton between foil and electrical contacts on rear of OSEM
• No OSEMs were removed from the suspension cage during this process, we tried to be as gentle as possible and don't believe the shadow sensor values changed during this work, suggesting we didn't disturb the coils (PRM wasn't EQ stopped either)

SRM

• The optic itself wasn't directly touched during the vent - but was EQ stopped as work was being done on ITMY
• It initially was NOT EQ stopped, and the shift in table level caused by moving ITMY cage to the edge of the table for F.C. cleaning caused the optic to naturally drift onto the EQ stops, leading to some confusion as to what happened to the shadow sensor outputs
• The problem was diagnosed and restoring ITMY to its original position made the OSEM signals come back to normal.

SR3

• Was cleaned by drag wiping both front and back faces

SR2/PR2/PR3/BS/OMs

• These optics were NOT intentionally touched during this vent
• The alignment on the OMs was not checked before close-up

Other checks/changes

• OL beams were checked on in-vacuum input and output steering mirrors to make sure none were close to clipping
• Insides of viewport windows were checked for general cleanliness, given that we have found the outside of some of these to be rather dirty. Insides of viewports checked were deemed clean enough.
• Steve has installed a new vacuum guage to provide a more realiable pressure readout.
• We forgot to investigate the weird behaviour of the AS beam that Yutaro and Koji identified in November. In any case, looks like the clipping of the AS beam is worse now. We will have to try and fix this using the PZT mounted OMs, and if not, we may have to consider venting again

Summary of characterization tasks to be done:

1. Mode matching into the Y arm cavity given the arm length change
2. HOM content in transmitted IR light from Y arm given the arm length change (Finesse models suggest that the 2f second order HOM resonance may have moved closer to the 00 resonance)
3. Arm loss measurement
4. Suspension diagonalization
5. Check the Qs of the optics eigenmodes - should indicate if any of our magnets, reglued or otherwise, are a little loose
12587   Fri Oct 28 15:46:29 2016 gautamSummaryLSCX/Y green beat mode overlap measurement redone

I've been meaning to do this analysis ever since putting in the new laser at the X-end, and finally got down to getting all the required measurements. Here is a summary of my results, in the style of the preceeding elogs in this thread. I dither aligned the arms and maximized the green transmission DC levels, and also the alignment on the PSL table to maximize the beat note amplitude (both near and far field alignment was done), before taking these measurements. I measured the beat amplitude in a few ways, and have reported all of them below...

             XARM   YARM
o BBPD DC output (mV), all measured with Fluke DMM
 V_DARK:     +1.0    +3.0  V_PSL:      +8.0    +14.0  V_ARM:      +175.0  +11.0

o BBPD DC photocurrent (uA)
I_DC = V_DC / R_DC ... R_DC: DC transimpedance (2kOhm)  I_PSL:       3.5    5.5  I_ARM:      87.0    4.0

o Expected beat note amplitude I_beat_full = I1 + I2 + 2 sqrt(e I1 I2) cos(w t) ... e: mode overlap (in power) I_beat_RF = 2 sqrt(e I1 I2) V_RF = 2 R sqrt(e I1 I2) ... R: RF transimpedance (2kOhm) P_RF = V_RF^2/2/50 [Watt]      = 10 log10(V_RF^2/2/50*1000) [dBm]
     = 10 log10(e I1 I2) + 82.0412 [dBm]
     = 10 log10(e) +10 log10(I1 I2) + 82.0412 [dBm]

for e=1, the expected RF power at the PDs [dBm]  P_RF:      -13.1  -24.5

o Measured beat note power (measured with oscilloscope, 50 ohm input impedance)        P_RF:      -17.8dBm (81.4mVpp)  -29.8dBm (20.5mVpp)   (38.3MHz and 34.4MHz)       e:        34                    30  [%]                           o Measured beat note power (measured with Agilent RF spectrum analyzer)         P_RF:      -19.2  -33.5  [dBm] (33.2MHz and 40.9MHz)       e:       25     13    [%]                          

I also measured the various green powers with the Ophir power meter:

o Green light power (uW) [measured just before PD, does not consider reflection off the PD]
 P_PSL:       16.3    27.2  P_ARM:       380     19.1

Measured beat note power at the RF analyzer in the control room  P_CR:      -36    -40.5    [dBm] (at the time of measurement with oscilloscope) Expected    -17    - 9    [dBm] (TO BE UPDATED)

Expected Power: (TO BE UPDATED) Pin + External Amp Gain (25dB for X, Y from ZHL-3A-S)     - Isolation trans (1dB)     + GAV81 amp (10dB)     - Coupler (10.5dB)

The expected numbers for the control room analyzer in red have to be updated.

The main difference seems to be that the PSL power on the Y broadband PD has gone down by about 50% from what it used to be. In either measurement, it looks like the mode matching is only 25-30%, which is pretty abysmal. I will investigate the situation further - I have been wanting to fiddle around with the PSL green path in any case so as to facilitate having an IR beat even when the PSL green shutter is closed, I will try and optimize the mode matching as well... I should point out that at this point, the poor mode-matching on the PSL table isn't limiting the ALS noise performance as we are able to lock reliably...

12613   Mon Nov 14 14:21:06 2016 gautamSummaryCDSReplacing DIMM on Optimus

I replaced the suspected faulty DIMM earlier today (actually I replaced a pair of them as per the Sun Fire X4600 manual). I did things in the following sequence, which was the recommended set of steps according to the maintenance manual and also the set of graphics on the top panel of the unit:

1. Checked that Optimus was shut down
2. Removed the power cables from the back to cut the standby power. Two of the fan units near the front of the chassis were displaying fault lights, perhaps this has been the case since the most recent power outage after which I did not reboot Optimus
3. Took off the top cover, removed CPU 6 (labelled "G" in the unit). The manual recommends finding faulty DIMMs by looking for an LED that is supposed to indicate the location of the bad card, but I couldn't find any such LEDs in the unit we have, perhaps this is an addition to the newer modules?
4. Replaced the topmost (w.r.t the orientation the CPU normally sits inside the chassis) DIMM card with one of the new ones Steve ordered
5. Put everything back together, powered Optimus up again. Reboot went smoothly, fan unit fault lights which I mentioned earlier did not light up on the reboot so that doesn't look like an issue.

I then checked for memory errors using edac-utils, and over the last couple of hours, found no errors (corrected or otherwise, see Praful's earlier elog for the error messages that we were getting prior to the DIMM swap)- I guess we will need to monitor this for a while more before we can say that the issue has been resolved.

Looking at dmesg after the reboot, I noticed the following error messages (not related to the memory issue I think):

[   19.375865] k10temp 0000:00:18.3: unreliable CPU thermal sensor; monitoring disabled
[   19.375996] k10temp 0000:00:19.3: unreliable CPU thermal sensor; monitoring disabled
[   19.376234] k10temp 0000:00:1a.3: unreliable CPU thermal sensor; monitoring disabled
[   19.376362] k10temp 0000:00:1b.3: unreliable CPU thermal sensor; monitoring disabled
[   19.376673] k10temp 0000:00:1c.3: unreliable CPU thermal sensor; monitoring disabled
[   19.376816] k10temp 0000:00:1d.3: unreliable CPU thermal sensor; monitoring disabled
[   19.376960] k10temp 0000:00:1e.3: unreliable CPU thermal sensor; monitoring disabled
[   19.377152] k10temp 0000:00:1f.3: unreliable CPU thermal sensor; monitoring disabled

I wonder if this could explain why the fans on Optimus often go into overdrive and make a racket? For the moment, the fan volume seems normal, comparable to the other SunFire X4600s we have running like megatron and FB...

12615   Mon Nov 14 19:32:51 2016 ranaSummaryCDSReplacing DIMM on Optimus

I did apt-get update and then apt-get upgrade on optimus. All systems are nominal.

12679   Mon Dec 19 22:05:09 2016 KojiSummaryIOOPMC, IMC aligned. The ringdown PD/Lens removed.

PMC and IMC were aligned on Friday (16th) and Today (19th).

The PD and lens for the ringdown experiment were removed as they were blocking the WFS.

12680   Wed Dec 21 21:03:06 2016 KojiSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning

- Updated the circuit diagrams:

IMC WFS Demodulator Board, Rev. 40m https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-D1600503

IMC WFS Whitening Board, Rev. 40m https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-D1600504

- Measured the noise levels of the whitening board, demodboard, and nominal free running WFS signals.

- IMC WFS demod phases for 8ch adjusted

Injected an IMC PDH error point offset (@1kHz, 10mV, 10dB gain) and adjusted the phase to have no signal in the Q phase signals.

- The WFS2 PITCH/YAW matrix was fixed

It was found that the WFS heads were rotated by 45 deg (->OK) in CW and CCW for WFS1 and 2, respectively (oh!), while the input matrices were identical! This made the pitch and yaw swapped for WFS2. (See attachment)

- Measured the TFs MC1/2/3 P/Y actuation to the error signals

12682   Thu Dec 22 18:39:09 2016 KojiSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning

Noise analysis of the WFS error signals.

Attachment 1: All error signals compared with the noise contribution measured with the RF inputs or the whitening inputs terminated.

Attachment 2: Same plot for all the 16 channels. The first plot (WFS1 I1) shows the comparison of the current noise contributions and the original noise level measured with the RF terminated with the gain adjusted along with the circuit modification for the fair comparison. This plot is telling us that the electronics noise was really close to the error signal.

I wonder if we have the calibration of the IMC suspensions somewhere so that I can convert these plots in to rad/sqrtHz...?

12683   Fri Dec 23 20:53:44 2016 KojiSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning

WFS1 / WFS2 demod phases and WFS signal matrix

12684   Fri Dec 23 21:05:56 2016 KojiSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning

Signal transfer function measurements

C1:SUS-MC*_ASCPIT_EXC channels were excited for swept sine measurements.

The TFs to WFS1-I1~4, Q1~4, WFS1/2_PIT/YAW, MC2TRANS_PIT/YAW signals were recorded.

The MC1 and MC3 actuation seems to have ~30Hz elliptic LPF somewhere in the electronics chain.
This effect was compensated by subtracting the approximated time delay of 0.022sec.

The TFs were devided by freq^2 to make the response flat and averaged between 7Hz to 15Hz.
The results have been summarized in Attachment 3&4.

Attachment 4 has the signal sensing matrix. Note that this matrix was measured with the input gain of 0.1.

Input matrix for diagonalizing the actuation/sensor response

Pitch

$\begin{pmatrix} -1.58983 & -0.901533 & -5592.53 \\ 0.961632 & -0.569662 & 1715.12 \\ 0.424609 & 1.60783 & -5157.38 \end{pmatrix}$

e.g. To produce pure WFS1P reaction, => -1.59 MC1P + 0.962 MC2P + 0.425 MC3P

Yaw

$\begin{pmatrix} 1.461 & -0.895191 & -4647.9 \\ 0.0797164 & 0.0127339 & -1684.11 \\ 0.223054 & -1.31518 & -4101.14 \end{pmatrix}$

12685   Sun Dec 25 14:39:59 2016 KojiSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning

Now, the output matrices in the previous entry were implemented.
The WFS servo loops have been engaged for several hours.
So far the REFL and TRANS look straight. Let's see how it goes.

12686   Mon Dec 26 12:45:31 2016 KojiSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning

It didn't go crazy at least for the past 24hours.

12688   Thu Dec 29 13:22:21 2016 ranaSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning
• For the rough calibration below 10 Hz, we can use the SUS OSEM cal: the SUSPIT and SUSYAW error signals are in units of micro-radians.
• It seems from the noise plots that the demod board is now dominating over the whitening board noise.
• If the RF signals at the demod input are low enough, we can consider either increasing the light power on the WFS or increasing the IMC mod. depth.
• We should look at the out-of-lock light power on the WFS and re-examine what the 'safe' level is. We used to do this based on the dissipated electrical power (bias voltage x photocurrent).

At Hanford, there is this issue with laser jitter turning into an IMC error point noise injection. I wonder if we can try out taking the acoustic band WFS signal and adding it to the MC error point as a digital FF. We could then look at the single arm error signal to see if this makes any improvement. There might be too much digital delay in the WFS signals if the clock rate in the model is too low.

12689   Thu Dec 29 16:52:51 2016 KojiSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning

Koji responding to Rana

> For the rough calibration below 10 Hz, we can use the SUS OSEM cal: the SUSPIT and SUSYAW error signals are in units of micro-radians.

I can believe the calibration for the individual OSEMs. But the input matrix looked pretty random, and I was not sure how it was normalized.
If we accept errors by a factor of 2~3, I can just naively believe the calibration factors.

> If the RF signals at the demod input are low enough, we can consider either increasing the light power on the WFS or increasing the IMC mod. depth.

The demod chip has the conversion factor of about the unity. We increased the gains of the AF stages in the demod and whitening boards. However, we only have the RMS of 1~20 counts. This means that we have really small RF signals. We should check what's happening at the RF outputs of the WFS units. Do we have any attenuators in the RF chain? Can we skip them without making the WFS units unstable?

12690   Thu Dec 29 21:35:30 2016 ranaSummaryIOOIMC WFS tuning

The WFS gains are supposedly maximized already. If we remotely try to increase the gain, the two MAX4106 chips in the RF path will oscillate with each other.

We should insert a bi-directional coupler (if we can find some LEMO to SMA converters) and find out how much actual RF is getting into the demod board.

12720   Sat Jan 14 22:39:30 2017 ranaSummarySUSITMY is drifting ?

https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:30889/detcharsummary/day/20170114/sus/susdrift/

ITMY is not like the others. Real or just OSEM madness?

12723   Mon Jan 16 21:03:47 2017 ranaSummaryIOOMCL / MCF / Calibration

Oot on the streets and in the chat rooms, people often ask, "What is up with the MC_F calibration?".

Not being sure of the wiring in the c1ioo model, I have formed this screencap of today's model and put it here. The MC_LENGTH and MC_FREQ are the filter banks which would calibrate these channels. In the filter banks there were various version of a 'dewhite' filter. They were all approximately z=150, p=15, g =1 @ DC, but with ~1% differences. I don't trust their provenance and so I've enforced symmetry and fixed their names to reflect what they are (150:15). I have also turned on one filter in MC_FREQ so that now the whitening of the Pentek Interface board is compensated.

Why is this TF 1/f? It should be -20 dB/decade if MC_F is in units of Hz* and MCL is a pendulum response. Perhaps its because the combination of the Koji summing box, the Thorlabs HV driver, and the Pomona box forms an additional 1/f ? IF so, this would explain the TF we see. Once we get confirmation from Koji, we can load the TF into the MC_FREQ filter bank and then MC_F will be in units of Hz (as will the summary pages).

(along the way I've also turned off the craaaazzzy servo input enable tickling that gets put in the MC AutoLocker every April Fool's leap year - resist the temptation)

Since we have a frequency counter system here and some oscillators, I wonder if we can just calibrate the MC_L and MC_F directly using a mixer lashed up to one of the counters. If so, and we can get the stabilized laser frequency noise down below 10 mHz/rHz, maybe this is a viable alternative method to the photon calibrators. Counting zero crossings is more honest than counting photons.

12732   Wed Jan 18 12:34:21 2017 ericqSummaryIOOMCL / MCF / Calibration
 Quote: In the filter banks there were various version of a 'dewhite' filter. They were all approximately z=150, p=15, g =1 @ DC, but with ~1% differences. I don't trust their provenance and so I've enforced symmetry and fixed their names to reflect what they are (150:15).

The filters were made in response to a measurement of the pentek whitening boards in 2015 (ELOG 11550), but this level of accuracy probably isn't important.

12748   Tue Jan 24 01:04:16 2017 gautamSummaryIOOIMC WFS RF power levels

Summary:

I got around to doing this measurement today, using a minicircuits bi-directional coupler (ZFBDC20-61-HP-S+), along with some SMA-LEMO cables.

• With the IMC "well aligned" (MC transmission maximized, WFS control signals ~0), the RF power per quadrant into the Demod board is of the order of tens of pW up to a 100pW.
• With MC1 misaligned such that the MC transmission dropped by ~10%, the power per quadrant into the demod board is of the order of hundreds of pW.
• In both cases, the peak at 29.5MHz was well above the analyzer noise floor (>20dB for the smaller RF signals), which was all that was visible in the 1MHz span centered around 29.5 MHz (except for the side-lobes described later).
• There is anomalously large reflection from Quadrant 2 input to the Demod board for both WFS
• The LO levels are ~-12dBm, ~2dBm lower than the 10dBm that I gather is the recommended level from the AD831 datasheet
 Quote: We should insert a bi-directional coupler (if we can find some LEMO to SMA converters) and find out how much actual RF is getting into the demod board.

Details:

I first aligned the mode cleaner, and offloaded the DC offsets from the WFS servos.

The bi-directional coupler has 4 ports: Input, Output, Coupled forward RF and Coupled Reverse RF. I connected the LEMO going to the input of the Demod board to the Input, and connected the output of the coupler to the Demod board (via some SMA-LEMO adaptor cables). The two (20dB) coupled ports were connected to the Agilent spectrum analyzer, which have input impedance 50ohms and hence should be impedance matched to the coupled outputs. I set the analyzer to span 1MHz (29-30MHz), IF BW 30Hz, 0dB input attenuation. It was not necessary to turn on averaging to resolve the peaks at ~29.5MHz since the IF bandwidth was fine enough.

I took two sets of measurements, one with the IMC well aligned (I maximized the MC Trans as best as I could to ~15,000 cts), and one with a macroscopic misalignment to MC1 such that the MC Trans fell to 90% of its usual value (~13,500 cts). The peak function on the analyzer was used to read off the peak height in dBm. I then converted this to RF power, which is summarized in the table below. I did not account for the main line loss of the coupler, but according to the datasheet, the maximum value is 0.25dB so there numbers should be accurate to ~10% (so I'm really quoting more S.Fs than I should be).

WFS Quadrant Pin (pW) Preflected(pW) Pin-demod board (pW)

## IMC well aligned

1 1 50.1 12.6 37.5
2 20.0 199.5 -179.6
3 28.2 10.0 18.2
4 70.8 5.0

65.8

2 5 100 19.6 80.0
6 56.2 158.5 -102.3
7 125.9 6.3 11.5
8 17.8 6.3

119.6

WFS Quadrant Pin (pW) Preflected(pW) Pin-demod board (pW)

## MC1 Misaligned

1 1 501.2 5.0 496.2
2 630.6 208.9 422
3 871.0 5.0 866
4 407.4 16.6

190.8

2 5 407.4 28.2 379.2
6 316.2 141.3 175.0
7 199.5 15.8 183.7
8 446.7 10.0 436.7

For the well aligned measurement, there was ~0.4mW incident on WFS1, and ~0.3mW incident on WFS2 (measured with Ophir power meter, filter out).

I am not sure how to interpret the numbers for quadrants #2 and #6 in the first table, where the reverse coupled RF power was greater than the forward coupled RF power. But this measurement was repeatable, and even in the second table, the reverse coupled power from these quadrants are more than 10x the other quadrants. The peaks were also well above (>10dBm) the analyzer noise floor

I haven't gone through the full misalginment -> Power coupled to TEM10 mode algebra to see if these numbers make sense, but assuming a photodetector responsivity of 0.8A/W, the product (P1P2) of the powers of the beating modes works out to ~tens of pW (for the IMC well aligned case), which seems reasonable as something like P1~10uW, P2 ~ 5uW would lead to P1P2~50pW. This discussion was based on me wrongly looking at numbers for the aLIGO WFS heads, and Koji pointed out that we have a much older generation here. I will try and find numbers for the version we have and update this discussion.

Misc:

1. For the sake of completeness, the LO levels are ~ -12.1dBm for both WFS demod boards (reflected coupling was negligible)
2. In the input signal coupled spectrum, there were side lobes (about 10dB lower than the central peak) at 29.44875 MHz and 29.52125 MHz (central peak at 29.485MHz) for all of the quadrants. These were not seen for the LO spectra.
3. Attached is a plot of the OSEM sensor signals during the time I misaligned MC1 (in both pitch and yaw approximately by equal amounts). Assuming 2V/mm for the OSEM calibration, the approximate misalignment was by ~10urad in each direction.
4. No IMC suspension glitching the whole time I was working today

12753   Wed Jan 25 10:46:58 2017 steveSummarySUSoplev laser summary updated

Oct.  5, 2015              ETMY He/Ne replaced by 1103P, sr P919645,  made Dec 2014, after 2 years

Jan. 24, 2017              ETMY He/Ne replaced by 1103P,  sr P947049,  made Apr 2016,  after 477 hrs running hot

12757   Wed Jan 25 18:18:08 2017 KojiSummaryIOOMCL / MCF / Calibration

jiSome notes on the FSS configuration: ELOG 10321

12759   Fri Jan 27 00:14:02 2017 gautamSummaryIOOIMC WFS RF power levels

It was raised at the Wednesday meeting that I did not check the RF pickup levels while measuring the RF error signal levels into the Demod board. So I closed the PSL shutter, and re-did the measurement with the same measurement scheme. The detailed power levels (with no light incident on the WFS, so all RF pickup) is reported in the table below.

IMC WFS RF Pickup levels @ 29.5MHz
WFS Quadrant Pin (pW) Preflected
1 1 0.21 10.
2 1.41 148
3 0.71 7.1
4 0.16 3.6
2 1 0.16 10.5
2 1.48 166
3 0.81 5.1
4 0.56 0.33

These numbers can be subtracted from the corresponding columns in the previous elog to get a more accurate estimate of the true RF error signal levels. Note that the abnormal behaviour of Quadrant #2 on both WFS demod boards persists.

12777   Tue Jan 31 17:28:36 2017 ranaSummaryCDSMinute Trend Koan

Someone installed "Debian" on allegra. Why? Dataviewer doesn't work on there. Is there some advantage to making this thing have a different OS than the others? Any objections to going back to Ubuntu12?

ELOG V3.1.3-