40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 46 of 339  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Category Subjectup
  11840   Wed Dec 2 18:54:20 2015 gautamUpdateCDSChanges to C1MCS, C1PEM

Summary:

I've made several changes to the C1MCS model and C1PEM model, and have installed BLRMS filters for the MC mirror coils, which are now running. The main idea behind this test was to see how much CPU time was added as a result of setting up IPC channels to take the signals from C1MCS to C1PEM (where the BLRMS filtering happens) - I checked the average CPU time before and after installing the BLRMS filters, and saw that the increase was about 1 usec for 15 IPC channels installed (it increased from ~27usec to 28usec). A direct scaling would suggest that setting up the BLRMS for the vertex optics might push the c1sus model close to timing out - it is at ~50usec right now, and I would need, per optic, 12 IPC channels, and so for the 5 vertex optics, this would suggest that the CPU timing would be ~55usecI have not committed either of the changed models to the SVN just yet

Details:

  1. On Eric's suggestion, I edited the C1_SUS_SINGLE_CONTROL library part to tap the signal at the input to the output filters to the coils, as this is what we want the BLRMS of. I essentially added 5 more outputs to this part, one for each of the coils, and they are named ULIn etc to differentiate it from the signal after the output filters. I have not committed the changed library part to the SVN just yet
  2. I used the cdsIPCx_SHMEM part to pipe the signals from C1MCS to C1PEM - a total of 15 such channels were required for the three IMC mirrors.
  3. I added the same cdsIPCx_SHMEM parts to the C1PEM model in the receiving configuration, and connected their outputs to BLRMS blocks. The BLRMS blocks themselves are named as RMS_MC2_UL_COIL_IN and so on.
  4. I shutdown the watchdogs to MC1, MC2 and MC3, and restarted the C1PEM and C1MCS models on C1SUS. Yutaro pointed out that on restarting C1MCS, the IMC autolocker was disabled by default - I have enabled it again manually.
  5. I was under the impression that each time a BLRMS block is added, a filter bank is automatically added to the C1PEM.txt file in /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/chans - turns out, it doesn't and my script for copying the template bandpass and lowpass filtes into the .txt files was needlessly complicated. It suffices to change the filter names in the template file, and append the template file to C1PEM.txt using the cat command: i.e. cat template.txt > C1PEM.txt. The computer generated file seems to organize the filters in alphabetical order, and my approach obviously does not do so, but the coefficients are loaded correctlty and the filters seem to be functioning correctly so I don't think this is a problem (I measured the transfer function of one of the filters with DTT, it seems to match up well with the Foton bode plot). 
  6. I added a few lines to the script to also turn on the filter switches after loading the filter coefficients.

Next steps:

Now that I have a procedure in place to install the BLRMS filters, we can do so for other channels as well, such as for the coils and Oplevs of the vertex optics, and the remaining PEM channels (SEIS, accelerometers, microphones?). For the vertex optics though, I am not sure if we need to do some rearrangement to the c1sus model to make sure it does not time out...

  260   Thu Jan 24 20:03:40 2008 AndreyConfigurationSUSChanges to Dataviewer channels (XARM)

1) Good news. I added a chanel "C1:SUS-ETMX_POS" to Dataviewer.

I followed the instructions from WIKI-40:

modify the file "C1SUS_EX.ini" in /cvs/cds/caltech/chans/daq,
then telnet to fb40m,
then "click the appropriate blue button on the DAQ MEDM screen".

So, I can now read a signal from the channel "C1:SUS-ETMX_POS" in Dataviewer,

and this allows me to measure Q-factors of ETMX this evening (make similar work for what I did on Tuesday for ITMX).


2) BAD NEWS. While "clicking the appropriate blue button" on the DAQ MEDM screen,
namely CODAQ_DETAIL,adl screen, I obviously clicked some blue button that I should not have clicked,
and as a result the signal in Dataviewer from the channel "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS" has disappeared (it is now a straight line).


Description of what has happened and of my wrong actions:
I had two channels opened in Dataviewer simultaneously (both "C1:SUS-ETMX_POS" and "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS"),
and after clicking some blue button on CODAQ_DETAIL,adl screen, the signal from "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS" became
a straight line,
while signal from "C1:SUS_ETMX_POS" continued to be a random noise.

I was scared that I made worse for the channels and for Dataviewer, and I started clicking random blue buttons chaotically hoping that it will restore the signal from "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS". Random clicking on arbitrary blue buttons did not return the signal.

As the channel "C1:SUS-ETMX_POS" works normally, I will be measuring Q-factors of ETMX tonight,
but it is obvious that someone else (Rana, Robert,Steve?) needs to restore the correct settings for "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS".

Moreover, as I was clicking chaotically all the blue buttons on CODAQ_DETAIL,adl screen, someone else (Rana, Robert, Steve?) will need to check somehow that I did not destroy signals from some other channels.

I apologize for the negative consequences of my channel adding,

but Rana asked me in the very beginning in September to let others know if I spoil something, so that others would be aware of it and could fix the problem.

Again, I apologize and hope that the problem is not very serious.
  263   Fri Jan 25 08:55:26 2008 robConfigurationGeneralChanges to Dataviewer channels (XARM)

As a general rule,


Quote:
clicking random blue buttons chaotically


is not a good problem solving technique. It is thus now explicitly discouraged as an option in the LIGO 40m Lab.
  265   Fri Jan 25 10:14:35 2008 robConfigurationSUSChanges to Dataviewer channels (XARM)

Quote:

2) BAD NEWS. While "clicking the appropriate blue button" on the DAQ MEDM screen,
namely CODAQ_DETAIL,adl screen, I obviously clicked some blue button that I should not have clicked,
and as a result the signal in Dataviewer from the channel "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS" has disappeared (it is now a straight line).


Description of what has happened and of my wrong actions:
I had two channels opened in Dataviewer simultaneously (both "C1:SUS-ETMX_POS" and "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS"),
and after clicking some blue button on CODAQ_DETAIL,adl screen, the signal from "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS" became
a straight line,
while signal from "C1:SUS_ETMX_POS" continued to be a random noise.

I was scared that I made worse for the channels and for Dataviewer, and I started clicking random blue buttons chaotically hoping that it will restore the signal from "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS". Random clicking on arbitrary blue buttons did not return the signal.

As the channel "C1:SUS-ETMX_POS" works normally, I will be measuring Q-factors of ETMX tonight,
but it is obvious that someone else (Rana, Robert,Steve?) needs to restore the correct settings for "C1:SUS-ITMX_POS".

Moreover, as I was clicking chaotically all the blue buttons on CODAQ_DETAIL,adl screen, someone else (Rana, Robert, Steve?) will need to check somehow that I did not destroy signals from some other channels.

I apologize for the negative consequences of my channel adding,

but Rana asked me in the very beginning in September to let others know if I spoil something, so that others would be aware of it and could fix the problem.


I eventually resolved the situation by restarting the c1susvme1 processor, which had somehow got confused by the clicking random blue buttons chaotically. The data acquisition should be working again.
  302   Fri Feb 8 17:09:52 2008 Max JonesUpdateComputersChanges to NoiseBudget
Today I altered the following files

caltech/NB/matlab/utilities/get_dtt_dataset
In DARM_CTRL case I changed the second channel name to DARM_ERR. Messy but it may be effective.

caltech/NB/matlab/noise/getUGF.m
I commented out lines of code specifically pertaining to non-existent DARM_DAQ channel. Marked in
code around approximately line 60.

Please address all comments or concerns to me (williamj(at symbl)caltech.edu). Thank you.
  10037   Fri Jun 13 18:16:00 2014 NichinUpdateElectronicsChanges to the PD frequency response measurement system

 

As we had planned yesterday (ELOG 10034) I and Eric Gustafson wanted to manually measure the transimpedence for REFL33. But on closer inspection I found the RF signal cable coming from the Photodiode REF DET (mounted on the POY table), that we were supposed to plug into the network analyzer, did not have an SMA connector at the end. There was just the Teflon and metal part sticking out of the insulation. So we disconnected the cable labeled REF DET from the PD and pulled it out to fix it. (POY table and from near the 1Y1 rack)

 

 

Being unable to locate any SMA male connectors in the 40m lab [pasternack PE4025], we headed over to Downs where Rich Abbott did a quick and awesome job of soldering the SMA connector and also teaching me in the process. I will write an ELOG on how to do a clean solder of the SMA connectors to the RF cable shortly for future reference.

 

 

Coming back to the 40m we rerouted the REF DET cable from near the 1Y1 rack and into the POY table. This job was done mostly by Eric. We were also unable to locate a torque wrench to tighten the cable at the PD’s end and had to leave it finger tight. Eric is planning to buy a new torque wrench as we will need it often.

 

 

Also, I cross checked the SwithList located at /users/alex.cole/switchList with the RF switch connections at 1Y1 rack and turns out it is consistent, except that at CH2 of the first switch where MC REFL was to be connected, there is a unlabeled cable. It might belong to the correct PD, but must be made sure of. The rest of the channels that are not mentioned in the list were unconnected on the RF switch.

 

Now instead of disconnecting REFL 33 to make measurements with the NA, we had to take out AS55 from the RF switch, as the former was very hard to remove without the torque wrench. Then Eric removed the optical fiber which was illuminating the AS55 (AS table) from its mount to hook it up to the power meter. But then we were not sure of how to operate the Laser diode controller (LDC 3744C) and decided to leave stuff as it is and continue either tomorrow or on Monday. Right now we closed the optical fiber of AS55 with a cap and it remains unmounted. The RF cables of REF DET and AS55 were left hanging near the 1Y1 rack.

  10062   Wed Jun 18 18:16:26 2014 NichinUpdateElectronicsChanges to the PD frequency response measurement system

[Nichin, Eric G, Koji]

Continuing out work from elog:10037, we wanted to check if the frequency response of AS55. Having figured out exactly how to use the Laser diode controller (LDC 3744C), we hooked up a fiber power meter to the optical fiber illuminating AS55 (that we disconnected from its mount last Friday ) and raised up the current to 150mA to get almost 0.8mW power reading.

When aligning the fiber to illuminate the PD, we found that the beam was pretty wide. So we pulled out the collimator and tweaked it to get a focused beam. The fiber was mounted back and was aligned to get a maximum DC reading. The multimeter readout 30mV finally. Taking the transimpedence as 200ohm approx., the hot current is about 1.5mA.

Network analyzer was now connected to the modulation input of the laser and the RF output from REF DET and AS55 (inputs to RF switch at rack 1Y1) were connected as input to measure the transfer function. We got just noise on the scope of NA. So, then we tried REFL33 as the Input and still got nothing (We were also not sure if this PD was properly illuminated, we did not check). However the REF DET was giving a nice response on the scope. Turns out all the PDs were disconnected form the Demodulator (D990511) on rack 1Y2.

On closer inspection the RF cable between domodulator and RF switch that was labelled AS55 had a loose SMA connector at the switch end. I will have to fix that tomorrow . For the time being Koji connected the cable labelled REFL33 to the AS55 demodulator and we finally got a response form the AS55 PD on the NA. However no readings were recorded. The power supply to REF DET was turned off in the end as Eric G claimed that it has been ON for almost a year now, which is not a good thing. Also, we removed the modulation input from NA to the diode laser and terminated the input with a 50ohm terminator.

We planned to pull out and check each and every RF cable (especially the SMA ends for faulty soldering and loose connections) and fix/ replace them as needed.

  10065   Wed Jun 18 21:53:48 2014 KojiUpdateElectronicsChanges to the PD frequency response measurement system

Not "hot" current but "photo" current. Is this my bad!?

It was me who told Nichin that the DC transimpedance was 200Ohm. But according to this entry I checked the RF transimpedance of AS55 before.
In my code, the DC transimpedance was defined to be 50Ohm. If we believe it, 30mV corresponds to 0.6mA.

Quote:

The multimeter readout 30mV finally. Taking the transimpedence as 200ohm approx., the hot current is about 1.5mA.

 

  3866   Thu Nov 4 19:26:51 2010 SureshUpdateLockingChanges to the Video MUX reversed

All the temporary changes to the video cables and the video MUX ( 3843 ) have been reversed and the system returned to its original state.

  9669   Tue Feb 25 02:46:38 2014 rana, jenneUpdateLSCChanging PRCL offset changes REFL 165 degeneracy

[Jenne, Rana]

We put offsets in the PRCL and MICH loops, and measured sensing matrices for each condition. 

What we found was that PRCL offsets of order 1/20th a linewidth (calibration to be checked tomorrow) would give significant changes in the angles of the REFL signal sensing matrix elements.  We broke MICH lock before we were able to put in a significant enough offset to see the demod phases change.

Because there are so many plots, I've put them together in a pdf. Each page has a set of radar plots for sensing matrix elements.  On the bottom of each page I note what our MICH and PRCL offset values were, and where the data is saved (in the 40m scripts directory). To see the differences, make sure your pdf viewer is set to single-page, not scrolling.

PRC_offsetCheck_24Feb2014.pdf

One major thing that we noted was that putting in a PRCL offset also changed the MICH offset.  When we increased the PRCL offset, we saw the AS port get brighter (but not as bright as when we were putting in large MICH offsets). 

Tomorrow, I need to check the calibrations we were using, to see how many meters we were moving the optics.  Also, Q, Gabriele and I need to meditate and do some modelling to figure out why the length offset could be affecting the degeneracy so strongly. 

  9670   Tue Feb 25 14:48:49 2014 ericqUpdateLSCChanging PRCL offset changes REFL 165 degeneracy

After speaking with Jenne and Gabriele, I did a little bit of simulating based on my earlier code that looked at the angle of MICH vs. PRCL, just with cavity detuning instead of macroscopic length change.

The zero point in the following plots is with the PRC locked on the sideband. The PRC detuning was done by changing the PRM-BS microscopic length (in terms of phase), and the MICH detuning was done by adding half of the detuning to the BS-ITMY distance, and subtracting half of it from the BS-ITMX distance. 

MICHvPRCLangle_wOffset.pdf

 

This plot is in terms of radians, so to roughly relate it to line width, here's a plot of the POP powers as a function of the PRC detuning. 

SBprclPeaks.pdf 

  9671   Tue Feb 25 16:07:33 2014 ericqUpdateLSCChanging PRCL offset changes REFL 165 degeneracy

 And glossing over the MICH offset, here's the PRC offset plots in displacement, rather than radians.

The simulation is actually slightly different now. I now use nominal ITM T values (T=.014) instead of the random R=.99 I had in place. 

MICHvPRCLangle_wOffset.pdfMICHvPRCLangle_wOffset_fullscale.pdf

(correction: Field Power should be Field Amplitude in the first plot)

  9676   Wed Feb 26 01:49:08 2014 JenneUpdateLSCChanging PRCL offset changes REFL 165 degeneracy

I have measured the sensing matrix at a variety of PRCL offset values.

DemodPhaseSeparation.pdf

During this each measurement, I also took a 20 second average of the POP 2f signals and the ASDC signal:

POP_AS_PDvalues.pdf

All of this data was taken during a single lock stretch. 

If / when I do this again, I want to go out to larger offsets.  I won't take as many points, but I do want to see how far I can go before I lose lock, and what the phase separation looks like at larger offset values (this time, I stopped at +700 counts which is about 0.7nm, to start checking the negative values. MC has been unhappy, so I wasn't able to take very many negative offset values.) 

I conclude that these sensing matrix measurements do see changes in the phase separation with PRCL length offset (what we saw / said yesterday), but that they do not line up with Q's simulation from this afternoon in elog 9671.

The simulation says that we shouldn't be seeing large phase changes until we get out to several nanometers, however the measurement is showing that we get large phase chnages with picometer scale offsets.  Yesterday, Rana and I said that the offsets due to RAM were small (of order picometer), and that they were therefore likely not important (elog 9668).  However, now it seems that the RAM is causing significant length offsets which then cause poor MICH/PRCL phase separation.

To Do List:

* Confirm MIST simulation with Optickle.

* Look at sensing matrix data pre-lockins (in the raw sensors).

* Check that there is no clipping anywhere in the REFL path (at least out of vacuum), and that the beam is sufficiently small on all 4 REFL diodes.

* Calculate the new PRC g-factor with the new length.

  3633   Fri Oct 1 11:33:15 2010 josephb, alexConfigurationCDSChanging gds code to the new working version

Alex is installing the newly compiled gds code (compiled on Centos 5.5 on Rosalba) which does in fact include the ezca type tools. 

At the moment we don't have a solaris compile, although that should be done at somepoint in the future.  It means the gds tools (diaggui, foton, etc) won't work on op440m.  On the bright side, this newer gds code has a foton that doesn't seem to crash all the time on Linux.

 

  517   Wed Jun 4 13:46:42 2008 josephbConfigurationCamerasChanging incident angle images
Attached are images from the GC650 and GC750 when the incident angle was varied from 0 tilt (normal incidence) to 5,10, and 20 degrees. Each time the beam was realigned via the last turning mirror to be on roughly the same spot. This light was a pickoff of the PSL table light just before it leaves the table.

Images include the raw data, fit to the data, residual normalized by peak power "w(1)", and normalized by the individual bin power.

The first pdf includes 0 degrees (normal) and ~5 degrees of tilt for the GC650 (CCD) camera.

The second pdf includes ~10 and ~20 degrees of tilt images for the GC650 (CCD) camera.

The third pdf includes 0 and ~5 degrees of tilt for the GC750 (CMOS) camera.

The fourth pdf includes ~10 and ~20 degrees of tilt for the GC750 (CMOS) camera.

Things to note:
1) GC750 camera seems to have a structure on the camera itself, somewhat circular in nature. One possible explanation is the camera was damage at a previous juncture due to too much light. Need to check earlier images for this problem.
2) GC650 has "bands" which change direction and thickness with angle. Also at higher incidence angle, the sensitivity seems to drop (unlike the GC750 where overall power level seems to stay constant with increasing angle of incidence).
3) GC650 seems to have a higher noise floor,seen from the last plot of each pdf (where each pixel of the residual is normalized by the power in the corresponding pixel of the fit).
Attachment 1: GC650_0dg_5dg.pdf
GC650_0dg_5dg.pdf GC650_0dg_5dg.pdf GC650_0dg_5dg.pdf GC650_0dg_5dg.pdf GC650_0dg_5dg.pdf GC650_0dg_5dg.pdf GC650_0dg_5dg.pdf
Attachment 2: GC650_10dg_20dg.pdf
GC650_10dg_20dg.pdf GC650_10dg_20dg.pdf GC650_10dg_20dg.pdf GC650_10dg_20dg.pdf GC650_10dg_20dg.pdf GC650_10dg_20dg.pdf GC650_10dg_20dg.pdf
Attachment 3: GC750_0dg_5dg.pdf
GC750_0dg_5dg.pdf GC750_0dg_5dg.pdf GC750_0dg_5dg.pdf GC750_0dg_5dg.pdf GC750_0dg_5dg.pdf GC750_0dg_5dg.pdf GC750_0dg_5dg.pdf
Attachment 4: GC750_10dg_20dg.pdf
GC750_10dg_20dg.pdf GC750_10dg_20dg.pdf GC750_10dg_20dg.pdf GC750_10dg_20dg.pdf GC750_10dg_20dg.pdf GC750_10dg_20dg.pdf GC750_10dg_20dg.pdf
  1579   Wed May 13 02:53:12 2009 robSummaryloreChannel Hopping: That ancient enemy (MC problems)

We were stymied tonight by a problem which began late this afternoon.  The MC would periodically go angularly unstable, breaking lock and tripping the MC2 watchdogs.  Suspicion fell naturally upon McWFS.

Eventually I traced the problem to the MC3 SIDE damping, which appeared to not work--it wouldn't actually damp, and the Vmon values did not correspond to the SDSEN outputs.  Suspicion fell on the coil driver.

Looking at the LEMO monitors on the MC3 coil driver, with the damping engaged, showed clear bit resolution at the 100mV level, indicating a digital/DAC problem.  Rebooting c1sosvme, which acquires all the OSEM sensor signals and actually does the side damping, resolved the issue. 

  1582   Wed May 13 14:43:29 2009 robSummaryloreChannel Hopping: That ancient enemy (MC problems)

Quote:

We were stymied tonight by a problem which began late this afternoon.  The MC would periodically go angularly unstable, breaking lock and tripping the MC2 watchdogs.  Suspicion fell naturally upon McWFS.

Eventually I traced the problem to the MC3 SIDE damping, which appeared to not work--it wouldn't actually damp, and the Vmon values did not correspond to the SDSEN outputs.  Suspicion fell on the coil driver.

Looking at the LEMO monitors on the MC3 coil driver, with the damping engaged, showed clear bit resolution at the 100mV level, indicating a digital/DAC problem.  Rebooting c1sosvme, which acquires all the OSEM sensor signals and actually does the side damping, resolved the issue. 

 Lies!  The problem was not resolved. The plot shows a 2-day trend, with the onset of the problem yesterday clearly visible as well as the ineffectiveness of the soft-reboot done yesterday.   So we'll try a hard-reboot.

Attachment 1: MC3sidemon.png
MC3sidemon.png
  1583   Wed May 13 21:15:04 2009 ranaSummarySUSChannel Hopping: That ancient enemy (MC problems)
The MC side problem could also be the side tramp unit problem. Set the tramp to 0 and see if that helps.
  1584   Thu May 14 00:15:39 2009 robSummarySUSChannel Hopping: That ancient enemy (MC problems)

Quote:
The MC side problem could also be the side tramp unit problem. Set the tramp to 0 and see if that helps.


This started around April 23, around the time that TP1 failed and we switched to the cryopump, and also when there was a mag 4 earthquake in LA. My money's on the EQ. But I don't know how.
Attachment 1: sidemon.png
sidemon.png
  1587   Thu May 14 16:07:20 2009 peteSummarySUSChannel Hopping: That ancient enemy (MC problems)

Quote:

Quote:
The MC side problem could also be the side tramp unit problem. Set the tramp to 0 and see if that helps.


This started around April 23, around the time that TP1 failed and we switched to the cryopump, and also when there was a mag 4 earthquake in LA. My money's on the EQ. But I don't know how.


I wonder if this is still a problem. It has been quiet for a day now. I've attached a day-long trend. Let's see what happens.
Attachment 1: mc3_5days.jpg
mc3_5days.jpg
  13662   Wed Feb 28 21:14:34 2018 gautamSummaryPEMChannel admin

Since we decided to use the Acromag for readback of the temperature sensor for Kira's seismometer temperature control, I enabled logging of the channel Johannes had reserved for this purpose last week. Kira has made the physical connection of a temperature sensor to the BNC input for this channel - it reads back -2.92 V right now, which is around what I remember it being when Kira was doing her benchtop tests. I edited C0EDCU.ini to enable logging of this channel at 16 Hz. Presumably, a study of the ADC noise of the Acromag at low frequencies has to be made to ensure appropriate whitening (if any) can be added. Channel name is C1:PEM-SEIS_EX_TEMP_MON. Similarly, there is C1:PEM_SEIS_EX_TEMP_CTRL which is meant to be the control channel for the servoing. Calibration of the temperature sensor readback into temperature units remains. It also remains to be verified if we can have these slow EPICS channels integrated with a fast control model, or if the PID temperature control will be purely custom-script based as we have for the FSS slow loop.

I removed the fast channels I had setup temporarily in c1als. Recompilation and restart of the model went smoothly.

Quote:
 I then made a "PEM" namespace block inside the c1als model, and placed a single CDS filter module inside it (this can be used for calibration purposes). The filter module is named "C1:PEM-SEIS_EX_TEMP", and has the usual CDSfilt channels available. I DQ'ed the output of the filter module (@256 Hz, probably too high, but I'm holding off on a recompile for now). Recompilation and model restart of c1als went smoothly. 
 
Attachment 1: tempSensData.png
tempSensData.png
  13873   Mon May 21 15:34:19 2018 gautamConfigurationElectronicsChannel hijacking history

Since we've been hijacking channels like there is no tomorrow for the AUX-PLL setup, I'm documenting the channel names here. The next time c1psl requires a reboot, I'll rename these channels to something more sensible. To find the channel mapping, Koji suggested I use this. Has worked well for us so far... We've labelled all pairs of wires pulled out of the cross connects and insulation taped the stripped ends, in case we ever need to go back to the original config.

Previously unused C1PSL Channels now used for AUX PLL

Channel name AI/AO Function
C1:PSL-126MOPA_126CURADJ AO Slow temperature control
C1:PSL-FSS_RFADJ AO Servo trigger TTL
C1:PSL-126MOPA_126PWR AI PLL error signal monitor
C1:PSL-126MOPA_DMON AI PLL control signal monitor
C1:PSL-FSS_PHCON AO

To mitigate integrator railing

  4152   Thu Jan 13 16:41:07 2011 josephbUpdateCDSChannel names for LSC updated

I renamed most of the filter banks in the c1lsc model.  The input filters are now labeled based on the RF photodiode's name, plus I or Q.  The last set of filters in the OM subsystem (output matrix) have had the TO removed, and are now sensibly named ETMX, ETMY, etc.

We also removed the redundant filter banks between the LSCMTRX and the LSC_OM_MTRX.  There is now only one set, the DARM, CARM, etc ones.

The webview of the LSC model can be found here.

  14744   Wed Jul 10 14:57:01 2019 KojiSummaryCDSChannel recipe for iscaux upgrade

The list of the iscaux channels and pin assignments were posted to google drive.
The spreadsheet can be viewable by the link sent to the 40m ML. It was shared with foteee@gmail for full access.

Summary

  • We need
    4 ADC modules
    5 DAC modules
    5 Binary I/O modules
  • Be aware that there are bundled multiple digital I/O channels such as "mbboDirect" and "mbbi".
  • The full db record of the new channels need to be inferred from the existing channels.

Necessary electronics modification

1. D990694 whitening filter modification (4 modules)

This module shares the fast and slow channels on the top DIN96pin (P1) connector. Also, the whitening selector (done by an analog signal per channel) is assigned over 17pin of the P1 connector, resulting in the necessity of the second DSUB cable. By migrating the fast channels, we can swap the cable from the P1 to P2.  Also, the whitening selectors are concentrated on the first Dsub. (See Attachment1 P1)

2. D040180 / D1500308 Common Mode Board

CM servo board itself doesn't need any modification. The CM board uses P1 and P2. So we need to manufacture a special connector for CM Board P2. (cf The adapter board for P1 T1800260). See also D1700058.

3. D990543A1 LSC Photodiode Interface

PD I/F board has the DC mon channels spread over the 16pin limit. P1 21A can be connected to 6A so that we can accommdate it in the first Dsub.
Also the board uses AD797s. This is not necessary. We can replace them to OP27s. I actually don't know what is happening to those bias control, temp mon, enable, and status. These features should be disables at the I/F and the PDs. (See Attachment2 P1)

Attachment 1: D990694-B.pdf
D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf
Attachment 2: D990543A1.PDF
D990543A1.PDF D990543A1.PDF D990543A1.PDF
  13710   Tue Mar 27 11:11:16 2018 KiraUpdatePEMChannel setup

[Kira, Gautam]

We setup the channels for PID control of the seismometer can. First, we ssh into c1auxex and went to /cvs/cds/caltech/target/c1auxex2 and found ETMXaux.db. We then added in new soft channels that we named C1:PEM-SEIS_EX_TEMP_SLOWKP, C1:PEM-SEIS_EX_TEMP_SLOWKI, C1:PEM-SEIS_EX_TEMP_SLOWKD that will control the proportional, integral and differential gain respectively. These channels are used in the script FSSSlow.py for PID control. We then had to restart the system, but first we turned off the LSC mode and then shut down the watchdog on the X end. After doing the restart, we disabled the OPLEV as well before restarting the watchdog. Then, we enabled the LSC mode again. This is done to not damage any of the optics during the restart. The restart is done by using sudo systemctl restart modbusIOC.service and restarted with sudo systemctl status modbusIOC.service. Then, we made sure that the channels existed and could be read and writtten to, so we tried z read [channel name] and it read 0.0. We then did z write [channel name] 5, and it wrote 5 to that channel. Now that the channels work, we can implement the PID script and check to make sure that it works as well.

  8911   Tue Jul 23 19:38:58 2013 gautamUpdateCDSCharacterisation of DAC at 1X9

 

 I just finished carrying out the same checks for the DAC at 1X9 (with channels 9 through 16 that are unused as of now) as those I had done for the DAC at 1Y4, as the hardware prep up till now was done with the characterisation of the DAC at 1Y4. Conclusions:

  • The accessible range of output voltage are -10 V to +10V w.r.t ground --> No change needs to be made to the gain of the HV amplifier stage on the PZT Driver Board
  • The pin-outs of the DAC Adaptor Board at 1X9 is identical to that at 1Y4 --> Custom ribbons do not need to be modified.
  • The PSD of the DAC output has a peak at 64 kHz --> Notches on AI Board do not need to be moved again.

I will now proceed to install various pieces of hardware (AI Board, PZT driver board, HV Power Supply and cabling) at 1X9, while not making the connection to the PZTs till I receive the go ahead. 

  3197   Mon Jul 12 15:49:56 2010 nancyUpdateSUSCharacterisation of the QPD

I and koji setup the measurement of the QPD response to the pitch and yaw displacements of the beam spot.

We did this using a 100mW 1064nm laser. Its power was attenuated to ~ 1.9mW, and the spot size at the QPD position was 6000-7000 um .

The QPD was put on a translation stage, using which, the center of teh QPD wrt the beam spot could be moved in pitch and yaw.

Following are the measurements :

For yaw

:fullyaw.jpg

The slope of teh linear region is -8356 /inch

yaw_linear.jpg

 For pitch

fullpitch.jpg

The slope of the linear region in this is 9085/inch

 

pitch_linear.jpg

 

  3198   Mon Jul 12 17:05:30 2010 nancyUpdateSUSCharacterisation of the QPD

Quote:

I and koji setup the measurement of the QPD response to the pitch and yaw displacements of the beam spot.

We did this using a 100mW 1064nm laser. Its power was attenuated to ~ 1.9mW, and the spot size at the QPD position was 6000-7000 um .

The QPD was put on a translation stage, using which, the center of teh QPD wrt the beam spot could be moved in pitch and yaw.

Following are the measurements :

 

 The old plots looked horrible, and so here is a new plot

plot.png

The slopes and other stats are

Pitch

Linear model Poly1:
     f(x) = p1*x + p2
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
       p1 =        8550  (7684, 9417)
       p2 =       -2148  (-2390, -1906)

Goodness of fit:
  SSE: 9944
  R-square: 0.9923
  Adjusted R-square: 0.9907
  RMSE: 44.59

Yaw

Linear model Poly1:
     f(x) = p1*x + p2
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
       p1 =       -8310  (-8958, -7662)
       p2 =        2084  (1916, 2252)

Goodness of fit:
  SSE: 6923
  R-square: 0.9954
  Adjusted R-square: 0.9945
  RMSE: 37.21

Attachment 1: plot.png
plot.png
  16939   Wed Jun 22 17:04:06 2022 DeekshaSummaryElectronicsCharacterising the AUX control loop

[Cici, Deekha]

Setup loop to measure transfer function of control loop - the aim is to find the open loop gain of the system using the SR785 to inject noise (a swept sine) into the system and taking observations using the scope. We tried to calculate the gain algaebraically, in order to understand what our readings meant and what we can determine from them. Need to figure out how to run python script for the SR785, but took readings from cmd today.

Included - changes/additions made to circuit; frequency reponse obtained (need to check the frequency response as it does not look like the expected result, need to correct the loop itself, or increase the magnitude of the inserted noise as its possible that the noise is currently being suppressed by the system).

To do - circuit needs to be checked + laser lock improved - laser keeps leaving resonance while trying to take readings.

 

Attachment 1: after.jpeg
after.jpeg
Attachment 2: before.jpeg
before.jpeg
Attachment 3: freq_response.png
freq_response.png
  14111   Sat Jul 28 22:16:49 2018 John MartynUpdate Characterization of Transimpedance Amplifier

Kevin and I meaured the transfer function of the photodiode circuit using the Jenne laser and agilent in the 40m lab. The attached figures depict our measured transfer function over the modulation frequency ranges of 30kHz-30MHz and 1kHz-30MHz when the power of the laser was set to 69 and 95 μW. These plots indicate a clear roll off frequency around 300 kHz. In addition, the plots beginning at 1kHz display unstable behavior at frequencies below 30kHz. I am not sure why there is such a sharp change in the transfer function around 30kHz, but I suspect this to be due to an issue with the agilent or photodiode. 

Attachment 1: PD_TF1.pdf
PD_TF1.pdf
Attachment 2: PD_TF2.pdf
PD_TF2.pdf
Attachment 3: PD_and_TIA_Transfer_Function_Measurements.zip
  14112   Sun Jul 29 00:59:54 2018 KojiUpdateElectronicsCharacterization of Transimpedance Amplifier

You have this measurement problem when the IF bandwidth is larger than the measurement frequency. I suspect the IF bandwidth is 30kHz.

  10036   Fri Jun 13 11:33:55 2014 AkhilUpdateElectronicsCharacterization of UFC-6000 RF Frequency Counter

 Goal:

To characterize the Mini-Circuits RF FC (Model UFC-6000) and plot Bode Plots at varying Modulation frequencies.

Work Done:

Here are the list of measurements(files attached) taken from FC using SRS(Model DS345) Synthesized Function Generator for a Sinusoidal signal at different Modulation Frequencies ranging from 0.01 Hz to 1 KHz:

Carrier Frequency                          Modulation Depth                                                        Attached measurement Folder 

5 MHz                                                     Δ f = 5 MHz                                                                            Bode_5

10 MHz                                                   Δ f = 10 MHz                                                                          Bode_10

20 MHz                                                   Δ f = 20 MHz                                                                           Bode_20 

 

The measured data will be used to estimate:

1) Transfer Function of FC 

2) Quantization noise from Power Spectral Density(PSD) vs Hz

 

To Do Next:

1)Complete interfacing the Pi with EPICS.

2)Make bode plots (Matlab script attached) and PSD plots and estimate the control parameters for optimal design of FOLL PID loop.

 

 

Attachment 1: Bode_Plots.zip
  10238   Fri Jul 18 17:10:57 2014 NichinSummaryElectronicsCharacterization of demodulator boards.

Rack 1Y2, I took transfer function measurements for each of the following demodulator boards: REFL11, REFL33, REFL55, REFL165, AS55, POP22, POX11 and POY11.

What I did:

1) Removed the wire at PD Input to demodulator board.

2) Put the MOD output from network analyzer into PD input of board.

3) Ran a sweep from 100kHz to 100MHz.

4) Measured the transfer function between PD RF MON and PD Input. (The PD RF MON signal came out of the RF multiplexer, so the mux is included as well )

5) Put the original wire back at PD Input.

Results:

The plots clearly show an attenuation of 20dB (factor of 10) for all the demodulator boards. This explains why my transimpedance measurements are off by 10 times.

Note: for REFL 165, there was an extra 100MHz high pass filter installed at PD Input. I did not remove this and made my measurements along with this.

To Do:

a) Modify the PDFR system to calibrate out this attenuation.

b) Measure the transfer function between the input and output of RF mux, so that we can have just the transfer function between PD input an PD RF MON (for documentation's sake)

 

Attachment 1: Demodulators_TF.pdf
Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf
  10252   Tue Jul 22 15:50:35 2014 NichinSummaryElectronicsCharacterization of demodulator boards.

Quote:

Rack 1Y2, I took transfer function measurements for each of the following demodulator boards: REFL11, REFL33, REFL55, REFL165, AS55, POP22, POX11 and POY11.

What I did:

1) Removed the wire at PD Input to demodulator board.

2) Put the MOD output from network analyzer into PD input of board.

3) Ran a sweep from 100kHz to 100MHz.

4) Measured the transfer function between PD RF MON and PD Input. (The PD RF MON signal came out of the RF multiplexer, so the mux is included as well )

5) Put the original wire back at PD Input.

Results:

The plots clearly show an attenuation of 20dB (factor of 10) for all the demodulator boards. This explains why my transimpedance measurements are off by 10 times.

Note: for REFL 165, there was an extra 100MHz high pass filter installed at PD Input. I did not remove this and made my measurements along with this.

To Do:

a) Modify the PDFR system to calibrate out this attenuation.

b) Measure the transfer function between the input and output of RF mux, so that we can have just the transfer function between PD input an PD RF MON (for documentation's sake)

 

I repeated the exact steps above and made sure everything was back where it should be after I was done.

Reason I had to retake the measurements:

My script for acquiring data from the AG4395A network analyzer was such that it first acquired the magnitude data from channel 1 and then recorded phase data from channel 2 without holding its trace. Hence the phase and magnitude data were not exactly in sync with each other. So, when I tried to fit the data to a model using vector fitting, I ended up with very bad results.

I have now changed every single script relating to the network analyzer to just get the real and imaginary data in one go and then calculate the phase using this data.

The fitting process is now in progress and results will be up shortly.

Attachment 1: Demodulators_TF.pdf
Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf Demodulators_TF.pdf
  10263   Wed Jul 23 11:54:27 2014 NichinUpdateElectronicsCharacterization of demodulator boards.

Quote:

 

I repeated the exact steps above and made sure everything was back where it should be after I was done.

Reason I had to retake the measurements:

My script for acquiring data from the AG4395A network analyzer was such that it first acquired the magnitude data from channel 1 and then recorded phase data from channel 2 without holding its trace. Hence the phase and magnitude data were not exactly in sync with each other. So, when I tried to fit the data to a model using vector fitting, I ended up with very bad results.

I have now changed every single script relating to the network analyzer to just get the real and imaginary data in one go and then calculate the phase using this data.

The fitting process is now in progress and results will be up shortly.

The plots in the previous Elog includes delay and a little attenuation by RF cables and the RF mux.

Today I separately calculated the delay and attenuation for an RG405 cable (550 cm) and the RF mux(using really small RF cables). These delays should be accounted for when fitting the transfer function of Demodulator boards and transimpedance of PDs.

The plots are in both semilogx and linear.

Attachment 1: 1.pdf
1.pdf 1.pdf
Attachment 2: 2.pdf
2.pdf 2.pdf
  5849   Wed Nov 9 14:49:07 2011 kiwamuSummaryLSCCharacterization of the Power Recycled Michelson

EDIT by KI:

  The definition of the recycling gain is wrong here.

See the latest entry (#5875)

 

Here is a summary about the Power Recycled Michelson (PRMI).

It seems the mode matching is also one of the greatest contributor on the low recycling gain.

 

 

 (Estimated parameters)

    Loss = 5.3% (or effective reflectivity of  93.28% in Michleson) => Under coupling !!

     +  Mode matching efficiency = 47.4 %  => Really bad !!

   With these values we end up with a recycling gain of 7 and a normalized REFLDC of  0.5 as observed (#5773).

Also according the incident beam scan measurement (#5773) the loss is NOT a local effect like a clipping, it is more like uniformly distributed thing.

As for the mode matching, the number indicates that approximately the half of the incident light is coming back to the REFL port without interacting with PRMI.

This is bad because the non-mode-matched light, which is just a junk light, is entering into the photo detectors unnecessarily.

In the worst scenario, those junk light may create a funny signal, for example a signal sensitive to the alignment of PRM.

 

(Estimation method)

The method to estimate the loss and the MM (Mode-Matching efficiency) is essentially the same as before (#5541).

One difference from the previous estimation is that the I used more realistic parameters on the transmissivity of ITMs and PRM :

     PRM : T = 5.637 %  (see the 40m wiki)

     ITM : T = 1.384 %  (see the 40m wiki)

 

 In addition to the basic calculations I also made plots which are handy for figuring out where we are.

Quantities we can measure are the reflected light from PRMI and the recycling gain using the REFL PD and the POY PD respectively.

So I wanted to see how the loss and MM can be estimated from the measured REFL DC and recycling gain.

The plots below are the ones.

contour_loss.png   contour_MM.png

[Loss map]

 The first figure shows a contour map of the loss as a function of the measured REFL DC and recycling gain.

The white area is a place where no proper solutions can be found (for example MM can get to more than 100 or loss becomes negative).

The star mark in the plot corresponds to the place where we are now. Obviously the loss is about 5%.

If we somehow decrease the amount of the loss the star mark will mostly go up in the plot.

[MM map]
 The second figure shows a contour map of the MM as a function of the measured REFL DC and recycling gain. 

The X and Y axis are exactly the same as that of the first plot. Again the star mark represents the place where we are.

We are currently at MM=47%

 

(Solutions)

Here are some solutions to bring the recycling gain higher.

We don't work on these things immediately since it requires opening of the chambers again and it will take some times.

But we should think about those options and prepare some stuff for a coming vent.

  + Refinement of the position of the mode matching telescopes.  => The Recycling gain can go up to 15.

     => Assuming the loss in the cavity doesn't change, the star mark in the first plot will go to the left hand side along the "0.05" black solid line.

     => However PRMI will be still under coupled.

     => Needs an estimation about which way we move the telescopes.

 + Locate the place of the dominant loss source and reduce it somehow.

    => The recycling gain will be more than 18 if the loss reduces by a factor of more than 5.

    => Needs a clever way to find it otherwise we have to do it in the classical way (i.e. white light and trying to find dirty surfaces)

  5851   Wed Nov 9 16:29:36 2011 KojiSummaryLSCCharacterization of the Power Recycled Michelson

Difficult to understand.

The mode matching does not change the recycling gain. It changes the coupling of the incident light into the cavity.
It changes the reflected and accumulated power, but the recycling gain is not affected.

The recycling gain is determined by the optical configuration and the optical loss in the cavity.

In the actual measurement, of course, we should take both of the loss and the mode matching into account.
But this is the issue of the measurement method.

The essential questions are:
How much is the actual recycling gain? And how does it affect the signal extraction?

  5875   Fri Nov 11 14:55:47 2011 kiwamuSummaryLSCCharacterization of the Power Recycled Michelson : take 2

Quote from #5851

The recycling gain is determined by the optical configuration and the optical loss in the cavity.

How much is the actual recycling gain? And how does it affect the signal extraction?

 As Koji pointed out I made a wrong definition on the recycling gain of PRMI (Power-Recycled Michelson Interferomter).

In the correct definition the estimated recycling gain is 15.
In order to answer Koji's second question,which is about the effect on the signal extraction,
I need to scratch my head for a while.
( Give me some time..)
 
The value what I called "Recycling gain" must have been called "measured power build up" or something like that.
For clarity I put the definitions of the quantities.
    Recycling gain :      rec_gain.png 

   Reflectivity of PRMI (measured by REFLDC): refl.png

    Power build up (measured by POY DC) : pbu.png

    Mode Matching (MM) efficiency :  MM.png

    Loss in the PRMI cavity : loss.png

 


 (Results of Measurement and Estimation)

     Estimated recycling gain = 15

     Estimated MM efficiency = 47.4%

     Estimated Loss = 5.3%

     Measured power build Up = 7

     Measured reflectivity of PRMI = 0.5

  16950   Mon Jun 27 13:25:50 2022 CiciUpdateGeneralCharacterizing the Transfer Loop

[Deeksha, Cici]

We first took data of a simple low pass filter, and attempted to perform a fit to both the magnitude and phase in order to find the Z of the components. Once we felt confident in our ability to measure tranfer functions, we took data and plotted the transfer function of the existing control loop of the AUX laser. What we found generally followed the trend of, but was lower than, 10^4/f, which is what we hoped to match, and also had a strange unexplained notch ~1.3 kHz. The magnitude and phase data both got worse after around 40-50 kHz, which we believe is because the laser came out of lock near the end of the run. 

Edit: 

[Attachment 2 and 3] are the frequency response of the low pass filter, curves fitted using least squares in python.

[Attachment 1 and 4] is the same measurement of OLTF of the actual AUX circuit, and the control diagram pointing out the location of excitation and test point.

Attachment 1: TF_measurement_b.png
TF_measurement_b.png
Attachment 2: transfer_function_mag_fit.png
transfer_function_mag_fit.png
Attachment 3: transfer_function_phase_fit.png
transfer_function_phase_fit.png
Attachment 4: control_flow.png
control_flow.png
  3419   Fri Aug 13 09:41:00 2010 nancyOmnistructureComputersCharger for dell laptop

 I have taken the charger for the dark gray dell laptop from its station, and have labelled the information there too.

Will keep it back tonight.

  16196   Wed Jun 9 18:29:13 2021 Anchal, PacoSummaryALSCheck for saturation in ITMX SOS Driver

We did a quick check to make sure there is no saturation in the C1:SUS-ITMX_LSC_EXC analog path. For this, we looked at the SOS driver output monitors from the 1X4 chassis near MC2 on a scope. We found that even with 600 x 10 = 6000 counts of our 619 Hz excitation these outputs in particular are not saturating (highest mon signal was UL coil with 5.2 Vpp). In comparison, the calibration trials we have done before had 600 counts of amplitude, so we can safely increase our oscillator strength by that much yes


Things that remain to be investigated -->

  • What is the actual saturation level?
  • Two-tone intermodulation?
  14060   Thu Jul 12 21:16:25 2018 aaronUpdateOMCChecking OMC Electronics

In preparation for tomorrow's vent, I'm checking some of the OMC-related electronics we plan to use.

First up is the HV Piezo Driver (D060283).

(well, technically the first up was the Kepco HV power supply... but I quickly tested that its output works up to 300V on a multimeter. The power supply for OMC-L-PZT is all good!)

According to the DCC, the nominal HV supply for this board is 200V; the board itself is printed with "+400V MAX", and the label on the HV supply says it was run at 250V. For now I'm applying 200V. I'm also supplying +-15V from a Tektronix supply.

I used two DB25 breakout boards to look at the pins for the DC and AC voltage monitors (OMC_Vmon_+/-, pins 1/6, and OMC_Vmon_AC+/-, pins 2 and 7) on a scope. I hooked up a DS345 function generator to the piezo drive inputn (pins 1,6). According to the 2013 diagram from the DCC, there is just one drive input, and an alternative "dither in" BNC that can override the DAC drive signal. I leave the alternative dither floating and am just talking to the DAC pins.

Aspects of the system seem to work. For example, I can apply a sine wave at the input, and watch on the AC monitor FFT as I shift the frequency. However, anything I do at DC seems to be filtered out. The DC output is always 150V (as long as 200V comes from the supply). I also notice that the sign of the DC mon is negative (when the Vmon_+ pin is kept high on the scope), even though when I measure the voltage directly with a multimeter the voltage has the expected (+) polarity.

A few things to try:

  • The DC_Readout electronics scheme on the wiki has separate oscillator and control inputs. This diagram has lied to us in the past and is older, and the traces on top of the breadboard seem to only go to pins 1 and 6, but I'm going to first try to apply a voltage across pins 2 and 7 in case there actually is a separate control I'm ignoring.
    • Driving on these pins seems to do nothing

On further investigation this was the key clue. I had the wrong DCC document, this is an old version of this board, the actual board we are using is version A1 of D060283-x0 (one of the "other files")

Gautam and Koji returned at this point and we started going through the testpoints of the board, before quickly realizing that the DC voltage wasn't making it to the board. Turns out the cable was a "NULL" cable, so indeed the AC wasn't passing. We swapped out the cable, and tested the circuit with 30V from the HV supply to trim the voltage reference at U14. The minimum voltage we could get is 5V, due to the voltage divider to ground made by R39. We confirmed that the board, powered with 200V, can drive a sine wave and the DC and AC mons behave as expected.

  14072   Sat Jul 14 16:04:34 2018 aaronUpdateOMCChecking OMC Electronics

Next check is the DCPD/OMMT Satellite Box

I traced a cable from the OMC electrical feedthrough flanges to find the DCPD/OMMT Satellite Box (D060105). I couldn't find the DCC number or mention of the box anywhere except this old elog.

Gautam and I supplied the box with power and tested what we think is the bias for the PD, but don't read any bias... we tracked down the problem to a suspicious cable, labelled.

We confirmed that the board supplies the +5V bias that Rich told us we should supply to the PDs.

We tested the TFs for the board from the PD input pins to output pins with a 100kHz low pass (attached, sorry no phase plots). The TFs look flat as expected. The unfiltered outputs of the board appear bandpassed; we couldn't identify why this was from the circuit diagram but didn't worry too much about it, as we can plan to use the low passed outputs.

Attachment 1: Screenshot_2018-07-14_17.53.40.png
Screenshot_2018-07-14_17.53.40.png
Attachment 2: Screenshot_2018-07-14_17.57.17.png
Screenshot_2018-07-14_17.57.17.png
  16995   Wed Jul 13 07:16:48 2022 JCUpdateElectronicsChecking Sorensen Power Supplies

[JC]

I went around 40m picking up any Sorensens that were laying around to test if they worked, or in need of repair. I gathered up a total of 7 Sorensens and each one with a Voltmeter. I made sure the voltage would rise on the Sorenson as well as the voltmeter, maxing out at ~33.4 Volts. For the current, the voltmeter can only rise to 10 Amps before it is fused. Many of the Sorensons that I found did not have their own wall connection, so I had to use the same one for multiple.

From these 7, I have found 5 that are well. One Sorenson I have tested has a output shortage above 20V and the other has yet to be tested.

Attachment 1: 658C5D39-11BD-4EE3-90E2-34CBBC1DBD3C.jpeg
658C5D39-11BD-4EE3-90E2-34CBBC1DBD3C.jpeg
Attachment 2: 5328312A-7918-44CC-82B7-54B57840A336.jpeg
5328312A-7918-44CC-82B7-54B57840A336.jpeg
  17005   Fri Jul 15 12:21:58 2022 JCUpdateElectronicsChecking Sorensen Power Supplies

Of the 7 Sorenson Power Supplies I tested, 5 are working fine, 1 cannot output voltage more than 20 Volts before shorting, and other does not output current. Six Sorensons are behind the X-Arm.

Quote:

[JC]

I went around 40m picking up any Sorensens that were laying around to test if they worked, or in need of repair. I gathered up a total of 7 Sorensens and each one with a Voltmeter. I made sure the voltage would rise on the Sorenson as well as the voltmeter, maxing out at ~33.4 Volts. For the current, the voltmeter can only rise to 10 Amps before it is fused. Many of the Sorensons that I found did not have their own wall connection, so I had to use the same one for multiple.

From these 7, I have found 5 that are well. One Sorenson I have tested has a output shortage above 20V and the other has yet to be tested.

 

Attachment 1: 50DF21D7-D61A-4674-B0DA-463378B00ADB.jpeg
50DF21D7-D61A-4674-B0DA-463378B00ADB.jpeg
Attachment 2: FA4CF579-6C1E-48D5-B152-74F35B4EE90B.jpeg
FA4CF579-6C1E-48D5-B152-74F35B4EE90B.jpeg
  4904   Tue Jun 28 22:36:04 2011 JamieUpdateSUSChecking binary switching of SUS whitening filter

I have been checking the binary output switching for the SUS whitening filters. It appears that the whitening switching is working for (almost) all the vertex suspensions (BS, ITMX, ITMY, PRM, SRM), but not for the ETMs.

The table below lists the output from my switch-checking script (attached). The script uses the SUS digital lockin to drive one coil and measure the same coil's OSEM response, repeating for each coil/OSEM pair. I used a lockin drive frequency of about 10 Hz, at which the whitening filter should have 10 db of gain.

All but one of the vertex OSEMS show the proper response (~10db gain at 10Hz) when the whitening is switched on from the digital controls. ITMY UL appears to not be switching, which I fear is due to my electronics fail noted in my previous log post.  The ETMs are clearly not switching at all.

I will try to get the ETM switching working tomorrow, as well as try to asses what can be done about the ITMY UL switch.  After that I will work on confirming the coil drive dewhite switching.

lockin settings

freq: 10.123 Hz
amp: 10000
I/Q filters: 0.1 Hz LP, 4-pole butterworth

response

BS
ul : 3.31084503062 = 10.3987770676 db
ll : 3.34162124753 = 10.4791444741 db
sd : 3.43226254574 = 10.7116100229 db
lr : 3.28602651913 = 10.3334212798 db
ur : 3.29361593249 = 10.3534590969 db

ITMX
ul : 3.37499773336 = 10.5654697099 db
ll : 3.2760924572  = 10.3071229966 db
sd : 3.13374799272 =  9.9212813757 db
lr : 3.28133776018 = 10.3210187243 db
ur : 3.37250879937 = 10.5590618297 db

ITMY
ul : 0.99486434364 = -0.0447226830807 db
ll : 3.39420873724 = 10.6147709414 db
sd : 3.88698713176 = 11.7922620572 db
lr : 3.357123865   = 10.5193473069 db
ur : 3.37876008179 = 10.5751470918 db

PRM
ul : 3.26758918055 = 10.2845489876 db
ll : 3.32023820566 = 10.4233848529 db
sd : 3.25205538857 = 10.2431586766 db
lr : 3.24610681962 = 10.227256141  db
ur : 3.31311970305 = 10.4047425446 db

SRM
ul : 3.30506423619 = 10.3835980943 db
ll : 3.28152094133 = 10.3215036019 db
sd : 3.08566647696 =  9.7869796462 db
lr : 3.30298270419 = 10.378125991  db
ur : 3.3012249406  = 10.3735023505 db

ETMX
ul : 0.99903400106 = -0.00839461539757 db
ll : 0.99849991349 = -0.0130393683795 db
sd : 1.00314092883 =  0.0272390056874 db
lr : 1.00046493718 =  0.00403745453682 db
ur : 1.00265600785 =  0.0230392084558 db

ETMY
ul : 1.00223179107 =  0.0193634913327 db
ll : 0.96755532811 = -0.286483823189 db
sd : 1.00861855271 =  0.0745390477589 db
lr : 1.05718545676 =  0.483023602007 db
ur : 0.99777406174 = -0.0193558045143 db
Attachment 1: botest.py
#!/usr/bin/env python

import sys
import os
import subprocess
import time
import pickle
from numpy import *
import nds
import matplotlib
... 207 more lines ...
  696   Fri Jul 18 17:12:35 2008 JenneUpdateIOOChecking out the MC Servo Board
[Jenne, Max]

One of the things that Rana thinks that might be causing my MC_F calibration to be off is that the MC Servo Board's filters don't match those on the schematics. Max and I pulled the MC servo board today to check resistor and capacitor values. Alberto needed the Mode Cleaner, so we put the board back before finishing checking values. We will probably pull the board again next week to finish checking the values.

I haven't checked to ensure that the MC still locks, because Yoichi is doing stuff on the PSL table, but I didn't change anything on the board, and hooked all the cables back where they were, so hopefully it's all okay.
  697   Fri Jul 18 19:15:15 2008 JenneUpdateIOOChecking out the MC Servo Board

Quote:
[Jenne, Max]

I haven't checked to ensure that the MC still locks, because Yoichi is doing stuff on the PSL table, but I didn't change anything on the board, and hooked all the cables back where they were, so hopefully it's all okay.


I put the PMC back and the MC now locks.
  11603   Tue Sep 15 20:44:13 2015 gautamSummaryLSCChecking the delay line phase shifter DS050339
I checked out the delay line phase shifter D050339, (theory of operation here) this afternoon. I first checked that the power connection was functional, which it was, though the power connector is is not the usual chassis one (see image attached, do we need to change this?).

The box has two modes of operation - you can either change the delay by flipping switches on the front panel or via a 25pin D-sub connector on the back (the pin numberings for this connector on the datasheet are a little misleading, but I determined that pins 1-9 on the D-sub connector correspond to the 9 delays on the front panel in ascending order, pin 10 is the mode selector switch, should be high for remote operation, pins 11 and 13 are NC, pin 12 is VCC of 5V, and pins 14-25 are grounded). I first checked the front-panel mode of operation, using an oscilloscope to measure the delay between the direct signal from the Fluke 6061 and the output from the D050339. This corresponds to the first set of datapoints in the plot attached (signal was 100MHz sine wave).

I then used a 25 pin D sub breakout boards to check the remote operation mode as well, which corresponds to the second set of datapoints in the plot attached. For this measurement, I used the Agilent network analyzer to measure the phase lag between the direct signal (for all delays, I measured the phase lag at 100MHz, having first calibrated the "thru" path by connecting the R and A inputs of the network analyzer using a barrel BNC) and the delayed output from the box, and then converted it to a time delay.

Both sets of data are linear, with a slope nearly equal to 1 as expected. I conclude that the box is functioning as expected. Right now, Koji is checking a board which will be used to remotely control this box. On the hardware side it remains to make a cable going from the DS050339 Dsub input to the driver board output (also 25 pin Dsub).
Attachment 1: IMG_20150915_193100.jpg
IMG_20150915_193100.jpg
Attachment 2: Calibration.pdf
Calibration.pdf
  16442   Mon Nov 1 14:51:34 2021 KojiUpdateGeneralChecking the vent plan

The vent team described a detailed vent plan (and reports where the actions have been performed)

https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/vent/Fall2021

- [Sec.4] We should decide the final PR2 mirror through table-top measurements.

- [Sec 6] BS alignment is probably "unknown" now. So it'd be better to use the ITMY spot as the reference, then align BS for ITMX. For temporary alignment, it's OK though.

- [Sec 9-11] RIght now there is no mounts to place LO3/LO4/AS2/AS3/BHDBS. But we probably want to test something before the installation of the BHD? Just place the BHDBS on a optics mount so that we get an interfered beam on ITMY?

At this point we are supposed to have all the electronics all the CDS necessary for the new SOS control. Otherwise, they are just swinging and the alignment work will just be impossible.

- [Sec 15] The OPLEV mirrors can be freely moved as long as it does not block the main IR beams. Moving ITMXOL1 makes the reflection blocked by ITMXOL2. And moving ITMXOL2 would make the IR beams clipped. Consider replacing the mounts with a fixed mount. (The OPLEV mirrors are 1.5" in dia. It is not common vacuum compatible 1.5inch mounts. If 1" Al mirror is sufficient, we can use it.

https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/vent/Fall2021/FinalAlignment

- The arms are the most strict alignment requirement. Everything else will follow the arm alignment. So start from the arms and propagate the alignment to Michelson / PRMI / SRMI.

- We reestablish arm alignment using the end green beams.

- Then recover IR arm alignment. Consider using ASS if possible

ELOG V3.1.3-