40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log  Not logged in ELOG logo
Entry  Thu Feb 7 12:56:18 2013, Jamie, Summary, General, PRC/arm mode matching calculations 8x
    Reply  Thu Feb 7 17:10:11 2013, Koji, Summary, General, PRC/arm mode matching calculations 
       Reply  Fri Feb 8 00:23:33 2013, rana, Summary, General, PRC/arm mode matching calculations 
          Reply  Fri Feb 8 11:07:07 2013, Jamie, Summary, General, PRC/arm mode matching calculations 
             Reply  Fri Feb 8 12:42:45 2013, nicolas, Summary, General, PRC/arm mode matching calculations 
Message ID: 8029     Entry time: Fri Feb 8 00:23:33 2013     In reply to: 8025     Reply to this: 8033
Author: rana 
Type: Summary 
Category: General 
Subject: PRC/arm mode matching calculations 

 

 I would guess that either flipping PR2 or PR3 would give nearly the same effect (g = 0.9) and that flipping both makes it even more stable (smaller g). But what we really need is to see the cavity scan / HOM resonance plot to compare the cases.

The difference of 0.5% in mode-matching is not a strong motivation to make a choice, but sensitivity to accidental HOM resonance of either the carrier or f1 or f2 sidebands would be. Should also check for 2*f2 and 2*f1 resonances since our modulation depth may be as high as 0.3. Accidental 2f resonance may disturb the 3f error signals.

ELOG V3.1.3-