40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 84 of 344  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Authordown Type Category Subject
  5282   Tue Aug 23 01:09:44 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSfree swinging test

excited all the optics ---

Tue Aug 23 01:08:00 PDT 2011
998122096

  5285   Tue Aug 23 09:40:37 2011 kiwamuUpdateGeneralRe: AS clipping fixed

Indeed it was suspenseful.

We tried finding where the clipping happened, but we couldn't find any obvious clippings.

So we checked centering of the beams on all the optics associated with the AS path, starting from BS, SR3,... to the AS optical bench.

And during the work some of them were recentered.

At the end we found no clipping. To make sure we tested the available range (no clipping range) by exciting the angular motion of BS with AWG (f ~ 1Hz, a ~ 1000).

The beam looked successfully coming out at the most of the angular oscillation point.

Quote from #5284

Where was the AS clipping?! Ah, the suspense...

 

  5287   Tue Aug 23 11:57:22 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSfree swinging test during lunch time

excited all the optics. (with ITMY WTF OFF)

Tue Aug 23 11:52:52 PDT 2011
998160788

  5290   Tue Aug 23 17:21:45 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSfree swinging test for ETMY

 

Excited ETMY

Tue Aug 23 17:20:45 PDT 2011
998180460

 

  5298   Wed Aug 24 16:13:36 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSbroke UL magnet on ITMX

I broke the UL magnet on ITMX

The ITMX tower was shipped into the Bob's clean room to put the magnet back on.

 

 Since we found that all the magnets were relatively high (#5296) in the shadow sensors, we decided to slide the OSEM holder bar upward.

During the work, I haven't made the OSEMs far enough from the magnets.

So the magnets and OSEMs touched as I moved the holder.

Then the UL magnets were broken off and fell into the UL coil.

 

  5316   Mon Aug 29 00:49:00 2011 kiwamuUpdateCDSRe : fb down

Fb is in a bad situation. It needs a MANUAL fsck to fix the file system.

HELP US, Jamieeeeeeeeeeee !!!

 

When Suresh and I connected a display and tried to see what was going on, the fb computer was in a file system check.

This was because Suresh did a hardware reboot by pressing a power button on the front panel.

Since the file checking took so long time and didn't proceed fast, we pressed the reset button and again the power button.

Actually the reset button didn't work (maybe ?) it just made some light indicators flashing.

After the second reboot the reboot message said that it needs a manual fsck to fix the file system. This maybe because we interrupted the file checking.

We are leaving it to Jamie because the fsck command would do something bad if unfamiliar persons, like us, do it.

 

In addition to it, the boot message was also saying that line 37 in /etc/fstab was bad.

We logged into the machine with a safe mode, then found there was an empty line in 37th line of fstab.

We tried erasing this empty line, but failed for some reasons. We were able to edit it by using vi, but wasn't able to save it.

  5326   Tue Aug 30 14:44:06 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSITMY released without opening chambers

The ITMY mirror was released. The OSEM readouts became healthy.

 

To see what is going on, I changed the PIT DC bias slider on ITMY from 0.8 to -1 or so, and then the optic started showing a free swinging behavior.

If there were no responses to the DC bias, I was going to let people to open the chamber to look at it closer, but fortunately it released the optic.

Then I brought the slider back to 0.8, and it looked still free swinging. Possibly the optic had been stacked on some of the OSEMS as Jamie expected.

Quote from #5320

ITMY, which is supposed to be fully free-swinging at the moment, is displaying the tell-tale signs of  being stuck to one of it's OSEMs. 

Do we have a procedure for remotely getting it unstuck?  If not, we need to open up ITMYC and unstick it before we pump.

 

  5329   Wed Aug 31 14:50:18 2011 kiwamuUpdatePhotospictures of OSEMs

The pictures that we took are now on the Picasa web site. Check it out.

Quote from #5280

Also, we took photos (to be posted on Picasa in a day or two) of all the main IFO magnet-in-OSEM centering, as best we could.  SRM, BS, PRM all caused trouble, due to their tight optical layouts.  We got what we could.

  5335   Fri Sep 2 13:12:08 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOtriple resonant box : ready to install

The triple resonant box was checked again. Each resonant frequency was tuned and the box is ready to go.

Before the actual installation I want to hear opinions about RF reflections because the RF reflection at 29 MHz isn't negligible.

It might be a problem since the reflection will go back to the RF generation box and would damage the amplifiers.

 

(Frequency adjustment and resultant reflection coefficient)

In order to tune the resonant frequencies the RF reflection was continuously monitored while the variable inductors were tweaked.

The plot below shows the reflection coefficient of the box after the frequency adjustment. 

refl_eom.png

In the upper plot, where the amplitude of the reflection coefficient of the box is plotted, there are three notches at 11, 29.5 and 55 MHz.

A notch means an RF power, which is applied to the resonant box, is successfully absorbed and consequently the EOM obtains some voltage at this frequency.

These power absorptions take place at the resonant frequencies as we designed so.

A good thing by monitoring this reflection coefficient is that one can easily tune the resonant frequency by looking at the positions of the notches.

Note that :

If amplitude is  0dB ( =1),  it means all of the signal is reflected.

If a circuit under test is impedance matched to 50 Ohm the amplitude will be ideally zero (= -infinity dB).

 

Reflections :

at 11 MHz = -15 dB (3% of RF power is reflected)

at 29.5 MHz = -2 dB (63% of RF power is reflected)

at 55 MHz = -8 dB (15% of RF power is reflected)

  5337   Fri Sep 2 17:52:16 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSITMX realigned

The new ITMX was aligned by changing the DC biases.

The resultant DC biases are reasonably small.

C1:SUS-ITMX_PIT_COMM = -0.2909

C1:SUS-ITMX_YAW_COMM = -0.0617

 

The alignment was done by trying to resonate the green light in the X arm cavity.

The spot position of the green light on the ITMX mirror looked good. This was confirmed by inserting a sensor card.

I did the OSEM mid-range adjustment and the rotation adjustment but at the end the OSEM DC voltage has changed due to the DC bias operation.

The OSEM rotation was approximately optimized so that all the face shadow sensors are sensitive to the POS motion but the SIDE shadow sensor is insensitive to the POS motion.

It needs a free swinging diagnosis.

  5338   Fri Sep 2 17:57:18 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSRe: ITMY released without opening chambers

It stacked again . We should take a closer look at it.

Quote from #5326

The ITMY mirror was released. The OSEM readouts became healthy.

 

  5339   Sat Sep 3 14:47:50 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOtriple resonant box : brief estimations about reflections and mode. depths

(RF reflections)

The reflected RF power going back to the RF generation box will be :

    Power at 11MHz =  2 dBm

   Power at 29.5 MHz = 3 dBm

   Power at 55 MHz = 9dBm

Assuming the input power at 11 and 55 MHz are at 27 dBm (40m wiki page). And 15 dBm for 29.5 MHz.

Since there is an RF combiner in between the generation box and the resonant box, it reduces the reflections by an additional factor of 10 dB (#4517)

In the estimation above, the reduction due to the RF combiner was taken into account.

 

(Modulation depths)

Besides the reflection issue, the circuit meets a rough requirement of 200 mrad at 11 and 55 MHz.

For the 29.5 MHz modulation, the depth will be reduced approximately by a factor of 2, which I don't think it's a significant issue.

So the modulation depths should be okay.

Assuming the performance of the resonant circuit remains the same (#2586), the modulation depths will be :

      Mod. depth at 11 MHz =  280 mrad

      Mod. depth at 29.5 MHz = 4 mrad (This is about half of the current modulation depth)

      Mod. depth at 55 MHz = 250 mrad

 

Quote from #5336

What are the reflected RF powers for those frequencies? 
Is the 29.5MHz more problem than the 55MHz, considering the required modulation depth?

 

  5345   Tue Sep 6 17:48:57 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSfree swinging test on ITMY

Tue Sep  6 17:48:02 PDT 2011
999391697

  5359   Wed Sep 7 16:21:35 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCarm loss measurement : resluts

Here are the results of the arm loss measurements, which I have done before the vent.

I ran the existing matlab script, called 'armLoss.m', to estimate the loss. The script resides in /scripts/LSC.


(Y arm)

 Round trip loss =  154.668624 +/- 11.343204 ppm

Yarmloss.png

The figure above is a time series of the measurement.

In the lower plot the power in the ASDC_PD are plotted. The green dotted-curve is the power when the Y arm is unlocked.

The blue dotted-curve is the one when the Y arm is locked.

In the upper plot the estimated loss from each combination of locked/unlocked power are plotted.

 


(X arm)

Round trip loss = ????? 50 ppm ?????

The obtained time series looked wired because difference in the ASDC power when the arm was locked/unlocked were small.

This small difference results in such a small loss.

To see what was going on I will look at the trend data.

Xarmloss.png

Quote from #5077

I did the measurement of the arm loss on both X and Y arm by running the armLoss script.

The results will be posted later.

 

  5360   Wed Sep 7 17:28:41 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCX arm loss measurement : not good

The measurement itself wasn't good.

I looked at the full 2 kHz data which was taken during the time when I was running the arm loss script on the X arm.

The plot below shows the raw data. The X arm was locked and unlocked sequentially several times.

The ASDC power didn't show a significant difference between the state where it is locked and unlocked.

I am not sure why, but It could be because of a misalginment or some kind of mode-mismatching, which can decrease the coupling efficiency of light going into the cavity.

 

Xarmlossmeasurement.png

 

(some notes)

The raw data were analyzed.

I split the ASDC data into two data, (1) low power state, when the cavity is locked (2) high power state, when the cavity is unlocked.

Then each state was averaged to estimate the averaged ASDC power in each case.

The number I obtained are :

    ASDC when X arm was locked = 54.77755 cnts

    ASDC when X arm was unlocked = 55.45830 cnts

Those numbers correspond to a round trip loss of  78.780778 ppm, which sounds too small for me.

Quote from #5359

To see what was going on I will look at the trend data.
 

 

  5363   Wed Sep 7 21:45:16 2011 kiwamuUpdateVACpump stopped. Pressure is at 450 mtorr

I stopped puming at 9:30 PM and the pressure in P1 is at 450 mtorr.

I followed exactly he procedure that Steve noted on his elog entry.

Here is a plot of the histroy of our pumping today.

vacuum.png

Quote from #5361

 1, close V3

2, close RV1 with torque wheel

3, turn off PR1 & 3

4, disconnect metal hose between RV1 and PR3

 I will start the Maglev tomorrow morning.

  5367   Thu Sep 8 20:13:24 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOMC is back to full power

[Suresh / Kiwamu]

 The attenuator was removed and now the MC is happily locked with the full power of 1.2 W.

 

(what we did)

 + replaced the perfect reflector, which was before the MCREFL_PD, by a 10% beam splitter like it used to be.

 + removed the attenuator (combination of HWP and PBS).

 + realigned the beam path on the AP table, including the MCREFL path and WFS path.

 + made the aperture of the MC2F camera narrower in order to avoid a saturation.

 + aligned the MC suspensions so that it resonates with the TEM00 mode.

 + put a ND filter on the AS camera

 

(notes)

C1:IOO-MC_RFPD_DCMON = 0.98 (locked)

C1:IOO-MC_TRANS_SUM = 17500 (locekd)

 

(next things to do)

 + measurement of the spot positions on each MC mirror.

 + centering of the beam spot by steering the input mirrors on the PSL table

  5368   Fri Sep 9 11:59:58 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOPZT1 doesn't work

Last night I noticed that PZT1 didn't work properly

I am not sure what is going on. Today I will try localizing the cause of the problem.

As far as I remember it was perfectly working at the time just after we readjusted the OSEMs on MC1 and MC3 (Aug 23th)

 

The symptoms are :

  + No response to both pitch and yaw control from EPICS (i.e. C1:LSC-PZT1_X and C1:LSC-PZT1_Y)

  + When a big value (-3 or so) from EPICS was applied, the PZT1 mirror suddenly jumped.

     However it turned out it just corresponded to a state where OOR (Out Of Range) LED lights up.

 

I did some brief checks :

  + checked the voltage going into the HV amplifiers' "MOD" input. Those are the voltage coming out from DACs and controlled from EPICS.

   --> looked healthy. They went from -10 to 10 V as expected (although the HV amp takes up to only +/-5V).

  + swapped the ''MOD" input cables such that C1:LSC-PZT1 controls the PZT2 HV and vice versa.

    --> The PZT2 mirror was still controlable, but the PZT1 mirror still didn't move. So the DAC and EPICS are innocent.

  + swapped the D-dub cables, which are directly going into the feedthroughs, such that the PZT1 HV drives the PZT2 mirrors and vice versa.

    --> the PZT2 mirror became unable to be controlled. For the PZT1 mirror, only PITCH worked smoothly.


  5369   Fri Sep 9 13:29:09 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOa history of PZT mirror

Something happened about 8 years ago.

Old iLog entry by AJW (2003/Sep/8)

Old iLog entry by AJW (2003/Sep/9)

Quote:

Last night I noticed that PZT1 didn't work properly

 

  5370   Fri Sep 9 14:55:03 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSOSEM pictures on ITMs

The OSEM pictures taken in Sep/6 have been uploaded to Picasa.

https://picasaweb.google.com/foteee

  5371   Fri Sep 9 16:16:59 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOspot positions on MC mirrors (in-vac)

The spot positions on the MC mirrors were measured in the vacuum condition.

The obtained spot positions are quite bad and roughly at 2-3 mm level. We have to realign the beam axis and the MC mirrors.

 

    Feb 26 2011      May 08 2011 Aug 2 2011  Aug 10 2011 (in air) Aug 14 2011 (in air)

Aug 23 2011 (in air)

[NEW]  Sep 9 2011
MC1 pit [mm]   1.6   1.9  1.93 -0.858 -0.2 0.1354  -1.55
MC2 pit [mm]   6.4   9.0 9.03 -0.844 -0.8 -0.2522  -2.28
MC3 pit [mm]   1.4   2.0 2.01 -1.03 -0.1 -0.1383  -1.8
MC1 yaw [mm]   -1.5   -1.7 -1.72 -0.847 -1.1 -1.0893  -0.02
MC2 yaw [mm]   1.0   0.2 0.178 0.582 0.6 0.7122  3.52
MC3 yaw [mm]   -1.3   -1.9 -1.87 -1.06 -1.1 -1.5587  -2.145

 

  5373   Fri Sep 9 20:52:59 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOspot positions on MC mirrors (in-vac)

The spot positions on the MC mirrors were readjusted.

All the amount of the off-center became smaller than 2 mm, which meet requirements of the beam clearance on the Faraday.

 

    Feb 26 2011      May 08 2011 Aug 2 2011  Aug 10 2011 (in air) Aug 14 2011 (in air)

Aug 23 2011 (in air)

 Sep 9 2011 [NEW] Sep 9 2011
MC1 pit [mm]   1.6   1.9  1.93 -0.858 -0.2 0.1354  -1.55  0.22
MC2 pit [mm]   6.4   9.0 9.03 -0.844 -0.8 -0.2522  -2.28  -0.34
MC3 pit [mm]   1.4   2.0 2.01 -1.03 -0.1 -0.1383  -1.8 -0.21
MC1 yaw [mm]   -1.5   -1.7 -1.72 -0.847 -1.1 -1.0893  -0.02 -1.15
MC2 yaw [mm]   1.0   0.2 0.178 0.582 0.6 0.7122  3.52 0.07
MC3 yaw [mm]   -1.3   -1.9 -1.87 -1.06 -1.1 -1.5587  -2.145 -1.07

 

 In order to improve the MC1-YAW and MC3-YAW spot positions, the angle of the incident beam has to be shifted by approximately 1/100 rad.

However it turned out to be very difficult to introduce such amount of angle only with the steering mirrors on the PSL table since we have to keep the same translation while changing the angle.

 

Quote from #5371

The obtained spot positions are quite bad and roughly at 2-3 mm level. We have to realign the beam axis and the MC mirrors.

 

  5374   Sat Sep 10 01:36:15 2011 kiwamuUpdateASCinterferometer coarsely aligned

The interferometer was coarsely aligned.

Now spatially overwrapped DRMI and FP arm fringes are visible on the AS camera although the incident beam alignment was done only with PZT2.

All the DC biases were saved so that we can go back to this condition any time.

 

/***** some health checks *******/

 [FINE] IPPOS : it looks okay but the spot on the QPD is a little bit too low by a few mm.

 [NOT GOOD] IPANG : maybe hitting a post or something because the spot is vertically split into two. The spot is too low.

 [FINE] POX/POY/POP : they all are coming out. POP is visible with an IR viewer.

 [FINE] REFL :  no clipping but the beam looks a little bit too low relative to the CCD camera.

 [FINE] AS : no clipping and the spot position on the AS camera looks fine.

 [FINE] Green beams : both X and Y beams are successfully landing onto the PST table without no clipping.

 [FINE] Suspensions : all of them are reasonably quiet without the oplevs, which is good.

  5375   Sat Sep 10 02:28:45 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSfree swinging test in vacuum condition

All the optcs were excited

Sat Sep 10 02:14:11 PDT 2011
999681266

 

  5384   Sun Sep 11 15:19:39 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCphase delay in RF signals

A comment :

Since the LSC RFPD have a long cable of more than 6 m, which rotates a 33 MHz signal by more than 360 deg, so the delay has always existed in everywhere.

The circuit you measured is a part of the delay existing in the LSC system, but of course it's not a problem as you said.

In principle a delay changes only the demodulation phase. That's how we treat them.

RA: Actually, the issue is not the delay, but instead the dispersion. Is there a problem if we have too much dispersion from the RF filter?

 

  5391   Mon Sep 12 23:54:10 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOEOM resonant box installed

[Mirko / Kiwamu]

 The resonant box has been installed together with a 3 dB attenuator.

The demodulation phase of the MC lock was readjusted and the MC is now happily locked.

 

(Background)

We needed more modulation depth on each modulation frequency and so for the reason we installed the resonant box to amplify the signal levels.

Since the resonant box isn't impedance matched well, the box creates some amount of the RF reflections (#5339).

In order to reduce somewhat of the RF reflection we decided to put a 3 dB attenuator in between the generation box and the resonant box.

 

(what we did)

 + attached the resonant box directly to the EOM input with a short SMA connector.

 + put stacked black plates underneath the resonant box to support the wight of the box and to relief the strain on the cable between the EOM and the box.

 + put a 3 dB attenuator just after the RF power combiner to reduce RF reflections.

 + readjusted the demodulation phase of the MC lock.

 

(Adjustment of MC demodulation phase)

 The demodulation phase was readjusted by adding more cable length in the local oscillator line.

After some iterations an additional cable length of about 30 cm was inserted to maximize the Q-phase signal.

So for the MC lock we are using the Q signal, which is the same as it had been before.

 

 Before the installation of the resonant box, the amplitude of the MC PDH signal was measured in the demodulation board's monitor pins.

The amplitude was about 500 mV in peak-peak (see the attached pictures of the I-Q projection in an oscilloscope). Then after the installation the amplitude decreased to 400 mV in peak-peak.

Therefore the amplitude of the PDH signal decreased by 20 %, which is not as bad as I expected since the previous measurement indicated 40 % reduction (#2586).

 

  5392   Tue Sep 13 03:18:14 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCY arm locking prep

(Preparation of Y arm locking)

(A) The f2a filters were newly designed and applied to ETMY (see the attachment)

(B) Once the Y arm is aligned such that the TEM00 mode flashes, the transmitted light is visible on the ETMYT CCD camera.

(C) With the newly installed resonant EOM circuit the PDH signal from AS55 looks healthy.

 

(some notes)

(A) To design the f2a filters there is a handy python script called "F2A_LOCKIN.py" in /scripts/SUS.

The script measures the coil imbalance at high frequency and low frequency using a LOCKIN module and then gives us the information about the imbalance.

The script hasn't yet been completed, so it doesn't return the intuitive answers but returns something non-intuitive. I will modify it.

 

(B)  To see the transmitted light from the Y arm I was going to align the CCD camera on the Y end table.

However I found that once the green light is blocked, the transmitted light can be visible on the camera without any re-alignment.

Therefore I haven't rearranged anything on the Y end table, but I just blocked the green light.

Perhaps we still need to align the photo diodes for the transmitted light.

 

(C) While Suresh was working on MC, I looked at the signal from AS55 with all the optics misaligned except for ITMY, ETMY and BS.

The signal from the Y arm looked very PDH signal, and the demodulation phase seemed to be about 45 deg to maximize the I signal.

I tried locking it by feeding the signal back to ETMY but failed due to a too much POS to angle coupling in the ETMY actuators.

I was momentarily able to capture a higher order mode with a negative gain in LSC-YARM_GAIN, but it was quite difficult to keep it locked.

This was because once I increased the gain to make it stable, the angle instability became more significant and lost the lock immediately.

This was the reason why I had to do the f2a filter redesign. Tomorrow we can try locking the Y arm.

  5398   Tue Sep 13 19:31:09 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCY arm locking prep

The Y arm has been locked with AS55.

A next thing is to check the spot positions on the ETMY and ITMY mirrors so that we can evaluate the recent beam pointing.

 

- - - parameter settings - - -

C1:LSC-YARM_GAIN = -0.03

AS55 demod phase = 0.2

WF gains = 21 dB

C1:LSC-TRY_OUT = 0.57 (maximized by steering PZT2)

Quote from #5392

This was the reason why I had to do the f2a filter redesign. Tomorrow we can try locking the Y arm.

 

  5400   Wed Sep 14 01:17:51 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCmeasurement of spot position on Y arm

The spot positions on ITMY and ETMY were measured using the LOCKIN modules in C1ASS when the Y arm stayed locked.

The beam was successfully aligned such that it hits the center of the ETMY mirror.

However on the other hand the angle of the beam is pitching and it's going upward as the beam propagates to ETMY.

 

/***** RESULTS ******/

Here is a summary of the measurement :

  amount of off-centering [mm]
ETMY_PIT  0.0032
ETMY_YAW  -0.13
ITMY_PIT  -12
ETMY_YAW  0.91

  

Also a cartoon is shown below.

The scale is not quite true, but at least it gives you a 3D information of how the beam is pointing down to the Y arm.

 misposition.png


  /***** MEASUREMENT *****/

 In order to measure the spot positions the standard technique, namely A2L, was used.

Since the C1ASS model was made for doing the A2L measurements on each arm cavity, the LOCKIN modules in C1ASS were used.

First the Y arm was locked with AS55 (#5398), and then the C1ASS was activated by calling some scripts from C1ASS_QPDs.adl.

In order to calibrate the signals from LOCKINs, an intentional coil imbalance was introduce.

This is the same calibration technique as Valera explained before (#4355) for measurement of the MC spot positions.

Quote from #5398

The Y arm has been locked with AS55.

A next thing is to check the spot positions on the ETMY and ITMY mirrors so that we can evaluate the recent beam pointing.

 

  5405   Wed Sep 14 14:06:44 2011 kiwamuUpdateGeneralminutes of 40m meeting : plans
+ Optical lever (Steve/Paul)
+ LSC demod board (Keiko)
+ DRMI locking (Keiko / Anamaria)
+ Modulation depth (Mirko)
+ ALS (Katrin)
+ MC WFS (Suresh)
+ OAF (Jenne/Mirko)
+ MC_F acquisition (Jenne/Mirko)
+ SUS, free swinging (Jenne)
+ CDS (Jamie)
+ vent plan (Jamie)
+ EOM (Kiwamu)
+ PZT-HV (Kiwamu/Koji)
  5406   Wed Sep 14 15:00:00 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCmeasurement of spot position on Y arm

Forgot to attach a picture of the ITMY's face camera when it was locked.

The horizontal position of the spot looks good, but the vertical position is apparently too low, which agrees with the A2L result.

DSC_3408_small.jpg

Quote from #5400
  amount of off-centering [mm]
ETMY_PIT  0.0032
ETMY_YAW  -0.13
ITMY_PIT  -12
ETMY_YAW  0.91

 

 

  5410   Wed Sep 14 21:18:45 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCY arm locking prep

Although we did some of the Input Matrix diagonalization, we have not yet actually used this knowledge. As a result all of the optics are shaking all over the place.

Sunshine Task: Set the input matrices to their calculated values and then adjust the OSEM damping gains for all optics so as to get a Q ~ 5.

  5417   Thu Sep 15 15:11:38 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSf2a filters on BS and PRM

The f2a filters were newly designed and installed on BS and PRM.

So the lock of PRMI will be more stable .

Once the SRM oplev project settles down, I will adjust the f2a filters on SRM too.

  5435   Fri Sep 16 16:29:05 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSf2a filters on SRM

New f2a filters were installed on SRM.

The lock of DRMI should be more stable than last night.

Quote from #5417

Once the SRM oplev project settles down, I will adjust the f2a filters on SRM too.

 

  5439   Fri Sep 16 17:46:13 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSSome screens fixed

The bad medm screens have been fixed. There are no blank fields and all the links are correct.

Quote from #5409

I've found that a few of the screens still have Whited-Out fields due to naming changes (OL SUM and ALS-> TM OFFSET). I attach a screen shot of it.

The OL screens have the wrong SUM names and the IFO ALIGN screen is pointing to the wrong SUS screens.

 

  5444   Fri Sep 16 23:22:36 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSETMX input matrix : bad YAW-SIDE coupling

With the new input matrix, it looks like YAW and SIDE are not quite decoupled on ETMX.

It needs one more kick and free swinging test.

 

- - - details

 To see what exactly is going on, I changed the input matrix from the default to the new one, which Jenne computed (#5421) on ETMX.

I started putting the elements of the input matrix from POS through SIDE, one by one.

It seemed that POS and PIT worked fine. However the YAW signal looks containing a lot of the SIDE signal.

Similar to YAW, SIDE also interact with the YAW motion and somehow rings up both YAW and SIDE signals as Jenne reported ( #5438).

So right now the YAW and SIDE rows are partially reburted to the default elements in order to avoid ringing up.

Quote from #5438

but ETMX and BS were not good at all.  ETMX was ringing up when I turned on the damping. 

 

  5446   Sat Sep 17 02:07:10 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSETMX input matrix : bad YAW-SIDE coupling

Excited all the optics. They will be automatically back after 5 hours.

Sat Sep 17 02:02:07 PDT 2011
1000285342

Quote from #5444

It needs one more kick and free swinging test.

 

  5452   Mon Sep 19 01:07:32 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSf2a filters on ITMs and ETMX

The f2a filters were installed on ITMs and ETMX.

Now all of the suspensions has the f2a filters.

  5453   Mon Sep 19 01:38:00 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCtoday's locking activity

[Anamaria / Kiwamu]

 The incident beam pointing was improved by using PZT1 and PZT2. 

With some triggers the lock of PRMI became smoother.

For the DRMI lock, the MICH and SRCL signals on AS55 are not quite decoupled, so we should find cleaner signals for them.

 

(what we did)

 + locked the Y arm

 + aligned incident beam by using PZT1(#5450) and PZT2. The spot positions on ITMY and ETMY are now well-centered.

 + tried activating C1ASS but failed. It needs some gain changes due to the new PZT1 response.

 + locked the X arm

 + aligned the TRX PD (Thorlab signal PD) and set the trigger.

 + C1ASS also doesn't work for the X arm

 + realigned the PRM and BS oplevs. the PRM oplev was clipped at a steering mirror on the optical bench

 + locked PRMI and aligned the PRM mirror such that the optical gain was maximized

 + optimized the demod phase of AS55 and REFL11

 + checked the UGF of the MICH and PRCL lock. The UGF of MICH is about 100Hz with gain of -20, and the UGF of PRCL was 85 Hz with gain of 0.1

 + adjusted the output matrix such that the MICH control doesn't couple into the PRCL control.

 + set the triggers for the MICH and PRCL control to make the lock acquisition smoother.

 + tried locking DRMI and it was sort of locked. However the SRCL signal showed up a lot in AS55_Q, where the MICH signal is extracted.

  5454   Mon Sep 19 02:08:24 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCfixed POP clipping

Actually the clipping of POP wasn't in the chamber but it was on the first lens on the optical bench.

So I repositioned the lens to avoid the clipping and now there are no clipping on POP.

Quote from #5445

We found that POP beam is clipped by the steering mirrors inside the tank.

 

  5455   Mon Sep 19 02:33:34 2011 kiwamuHowToGeneralPlan for this week

GOAL1:  Stable lock of DRMI

GOAL2:  Measurement of the LSC input matrix in the DRMI configuration

 

 /- - Daytime works - - /

  + Measurement of the arm lengths (Jenne / Kiwamu / volunteers)

  + Optimization of the oplev control loops (Paul)

  + Inversion and installation of the SUS input matrices (Jenne)

  + Tuning of the SUS damping gains (Steve)

  + Measurement of the modulation depths (Mirko)

  + Preparation of the green broadband PD (Katrin)

  + Fixing the Y arm green lock servo (Katrin / Kiwamu)

  + Installation of RFPDs (Anamaria)

  + Minimization of the AM sidebands (Anamaria / Keiko)

  + Preparation of a script for measuring the LSC input matrix (Keiko)

  + MC WFS (Suresh)

  + Online adaptive filtering (Mirko / Jenne)

  + Modification of C1ASS (Kiwamu)

  + Fixing IPPOS (volunteers) 

  + Auto alignment of PRCL and SRCL (volunteers)

  + Loss measurement of the arm cavities (volunteers)

  + Fixing the ETMX SIDE slow monitor (volunteers)

 

 /- - Nighttime works - - /

 + Locking of DRMI

 + Characterization of DRMI and complete the wiki page

  5459   Mon Sep 19 14:57:36 2011 kiwamuSummaryIOOIP POS is back

IPPOS is back. A cable had been disconnected at the 1Y2 rack. So I put it back to place.

The cartoon below shows the current wiring diagram. I think this configuration is exactly the same as it it used to be.

wiring.png

Quote from #5455

  + Fixing IPPOS (volunteers) 

  5463   Mon Sep 19 16:20:35 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCAS55 whitening gain decreased

The gain of whitening filters on AS55 was decreased from 21 dB to 0 dB for the Y arm locking.

 

- - (Background)- -

Since the modulation depths became bigger from the past (#5462), the PDH signal from Y arm was saturated in the path of AS55.

Due to the saturation the lock of the Y arm became quite difficult so I decreased the gain of of the whitening filter from 21 dB to 0 dB.

In this condition, a required gain in C1:LSC-YARM_GAIN is about -0.3, which is 10 times bigger from the default number.

For the MICH locking tonight, it may need to be back to a big gain.

  5478   Tue Sep 20 13:57:44 2011 kiwamuUpdateIOOincident beam to MC aligned

Since the MC wasn't able to capture the 00 mode in this morning I aligned the incident beam going to MC.

As a result C1:IOO-RFPD_DCMON went down to 0.6. However the beam on IPPOS is almost falling off from the QPD.

  5482   Tue Sep 20 15:54:42 2011 kiwamuUpdateCamerasMC refl camera is available

[Suresh / Kiwamu]

 The MC REFL camera is now available. The camera name is "MCR" and you can call it from the videoswitch script.

 

(what we did)

 + repositioned and aligned the MCR camera.

 + checked the MCR camera.

  => found the camera view shows a negative image (i.e. the beam spot is dark and the background is bright !!)

 + replaced the camera by a spare one.

 + modified the videoswitch script because the input channel 3 was wrongly assigned to MCR.

  MCR was correctly assigned to the input channel 18.

  5486   Tue Sep 20 17:45:30 2011 kiwamuUpdateCDSdaqd is restarting by hisself ?

[Jenne / Kiwamu]

 Fb was sick. Dataviewer and Fourier Tools didn't work for a while.

After 10 minutes later they became healthy again. No idea what exactly was going on.

One thing we found was that : during the sickness of fb, it looks like daqd was restarting by hisself. Is this normal ??

Here is the bottom sentences of restart.log. Apparently daqd was rebooting although we didn't command to do so.

  daqd_start Tue Sep 20 02:41:17 PDT 2011
  daqd_start Tue Sep 20 13:18:12 PDT 2011
  daqd_start Tue Sep 20 17:33:00 PDT 2011

  5508   Wed Sep 21 23:25:51 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSRe:ITMY and SRM actuator response functions - fitting results

Did you take the 180 deg shift into your account ?

Since your measurement was done when the loop was closed, there must be an additional 180 deg phase shift (in other words, minus sign).

Quote from #5507

In the end I just fitted the response magnitude. I was initially fitting the complex response function, but ran into problems which I think were cased by overall phase offsets between the data and test function. Can I canvass for opinion if fitting the magnitude is OK, or should I try again fitting the phase too?

  5515   Thu Sep 22 11:49:05 2011 kiwamuUpdateLSCsome LSC scripts don't run on pianosa

Found some LSC scripts didn't run on pianosa. Particularly all the scripts on the C1:IFO_CONFIGURE screen don't run.

They need to be fixed.

  5518   Thu Sep 22 13:56:56 2011 kiwamuUpdateASCC1ASS : status update

The output matrix in the C1ASS servo were coarsely readjusted and the servos seemed working.

However it is difficult to say the servo is very good or so-so,

because the ETMY suspension moves a lot and hence the cavity eigen axis moves a lot too.

 


(to do)

 + optimization of the ETMY oplevs and OSEM damping.
 + evaluation of the performance of the C1ASS with a good damping.

(Background)

 Since we have installed the new mid-HV amplifier for the PZT1 mirror (#5450) it changed the response of the PZT1 (gains from EPICS to the actual angles).
Therefore the C1ASS output matrix needs be adapted to the new PZT1 response.
 
(What I have done)
  What I was measuring was a coupling from each PZT mirror to both beam angle and beam position by looking at the output from the LOCKINs.
So this measurement eventually gives us a nicely diagonalized output matrix by inverting the coupling.
However the measurement turned out to be difficult because the ETMY moved too much.
In fact the cavity eigen axis also moves and the fluctuation was larger than the intentionally introduced beam angle/translation offsets, which are for the coupling measurement.
 
 Instead of measuring the couplings, I put some numbers into the matrix based on a guess.
Since the PZT1 HV amp became weaker than that of PZT2, the elements in the output matrix should be amplified by some number.
Right now the PZT1 amp can drive the mirror in a range of -5 -30 V with EPICS range of +/-10 counts, and for PZT2 it is about 0 -150V with EPICS range of +/-5 counts.
So the difference of the responses in unit of V/counts is about 8.5.
The PZT1 elements in the matrix were multiplied by this number and I became able to close the servos.

Quote from #5455

  + Modification of C1ASS (Kiwamu)

  5521   Thu Sep 22 17:48:20 2011 kiwamuUpdateSUSbad oplev on ETMY

It turned out the oplev controls on ETMY were just bad.

It looks like the whitening filters have been OFF and because of that the resultant open-loop was not crossing the unity gain.

I will check the whitening filters.

 

(open-loop transfer function)

The blue dots are the measured data points and the green curve is the fit.

Apparently the open-loop doesn't go above the unity gain, so the oplev had been doing nothing.

If we try to increase the overall gain it will oscillate because of the phase delay of more than 180 deg around 3 Hz.

The red curve is the expected one with the whitening filters (WFs) properly engaged.

Note that WF are supposed to have two zeros at 1 Hz and two poles at 10 Hz.

 OLETMY.png

Quote from #5518
(to do)
 + optimization of the ETMY oplevs and OSEM damping.

ELOG V3.1.3-