40m
QIL
Cryo_Lab
CTN
SUS_Lab
TCS_Lab
OMC_Lab
CRIME_Lab
FEA
ENG_Labs
OptContFac
Mariner
WBEEShop
|
40m Log |
Not logged in |
 |
|
Thu Dec 1 20:20:15 2016, gautam, Update, IMC, IMC loss measurement plan
|
Fri Dec 2 16:40:29 2016, gautam, Update, IMC, 24V fuse pulled out
|
Mon Dec 5 01:58:16 2016, gautam, Update, IMC, IMC ringdowns 
|
Mon Dec 5 15:55:25 2016, gautam, Update, IMC, IMC ringdowns 7x
|
Mon Dec 5 19:29:52 2016, gautam, Update, IMC, IMC ringdowns
|
Tue Dec 6 00:43:41 2016, gautam, Update, IMC, more IMC ringdowns
|
Wed Dec 7 11:52:48 2016, ericq, Update, IMC, Partial IMC ringdowns 
|
Thu Dec 8 19:01:21 2016, rana, Update, IMC, Partial IMC ringdowns
|
Sun Dec 2 17:26:58 2018, gautam, Update, IMC, IMC ringdown fitting   
|
Fri Dec 7 12:51:06 2018, gautam, Update, IMC, IMC ringdown fitting  
|
|
Message ID: 12672
Entry time: Wed Dec 7 11:52:48 2016
In reply to: 12667
Reply to this: 12675
|
Author: |
ericq |
Type: |
Update |
Category: |
IMC |
Subject: |
Partial IMC ringdowns |
|
|
The transients are likely due to doppler interference due to the input laser frequency sloshing due to errant control signals after the IMC unlock. I performed a few "partial" ringdowns by reducing the power by about 80% while keeping the IMC servo locked. (Function generator at 0.5Vpp square wave, 0.25V offet. Turned IMC boosts off to increase the stable range of the servo).
I need to work out how to extract the loss from this, I think having a partial ringdown may change the calculations somewhat; the time constants in the trans and refl signals are not identical.

Thanks to Gautams nice setup, it was very easy to take these measurements. Thanks! Code and data attached. |
|