ID |
Date |
Author |
Type |
Category |
Subject |
9456
|
Thu Dec 12 00:47:45 2013 |
Den | Update | LSC | locking activity |
Jenne, Den
Today we worked on PRM angular servos and Y-arm ALS stabilization.
In the current PRMI angular control configuration two servos simultaneously drive PRM - oplev and POP ASC. We considered 2 ways to redesign this topology:
- once lock is acquired, turn on POP ASC servo that corrects oplev error signal
- turn off PRM oplev and turn on POP ASC servo
The first option requires model rewiring so we started from the second one. We had to redesign POP ASC pitch and yaw servos for this because PRM TF has changed. Attached is servo OLTF.
This method worked out well and once PRMI is locked we turned off oplev servo with ramp of 0.5 sec and enable ASC POP servo with ramp of 1 sec.
Once PRMI was locked and ASC running we have turned off PRM angular local damping that presumably prevents us from bringing arms into resonance due to IR coupling to shadow sensors.
PRMI was stable using only ASC POP servo and we moved on to ALS. We found Y-arm beatnote and enabled control to ETMY.
Cavity was stabilized but not robust - we were loosing IR in a minute because green relocked to 01 mode with transmission equal to more than half of 00 mode. This is probably due to angle to length coupling of ETMY.
We were also loosing IMC during cavity stabilization. We made MCL servo and will tune it tomorrow looking at the arm spectrum as an OOL sensor. |
Attachment 1: POP_ASC.pdf
|
|
9462
|
Fri Dec 13 02:19:57 2013 |
Jenne | Update | LSC | locking activity |
[Jenne, Den]
Tonight we worked on tweaking up the PRCL new ASC, and then PRMI+1 arm locking. We were unable to get the Xarm to stay locked on a TEM00 mode for very long, and after an hour or two of using the PZTs to try to align the beam to the cavity, we gave up and just used Yarm green.
NB: We haven't done anything to MCL, although it is not in use. Den is still going to get around to elogging what servo shaping he changed on that last night.
I wrote a script that will handle the transitions between the new PRCL ASC and the PRM oplev and local damping. The script is accessible from the PRC ASC screen, and will detect when the PRMI is locked or not. When it is locked, it will turn down the PRM oplev gains and turn on the ASC, and then it will turn off the local shadow sensor damping for PRM pitch and yaw. When the PRMI unlocks, the script will turn off the ASC and restore oplev and local shadow sensor damping.
We saw that the bounce mode of the PRM was getting rung up with our new ASC, so we included a band stop in the ASC, and also turned on the triggering for the PRCL LSC FM6, which has the resonant gain for the bounce mode (as well as roll, and the stack mode). This made the PRMI spot very stable.
We then moved on to green arm locking. The Yarm is behaving perfectly nicely (as nice as it has been lately - it's alignment and mode matching could also use some work), but Xarm was giving us a bit of trouble. As always (since the PZTs were installed?), the mode matching isn't excellent for the green to the arm, so it can be hard to catch a TEM00 mode. Also, even if we did catch a good mode, it would often not stay locked for more than a few tens of seconds. We tried several alignment tweakings, and several different end laser temperatures (within the confines of seeing the beatnote under 100MHz), and didn't have a lot of success. It looks like Eric had the slow servo engaged for the Xend laser, so the temperature offset was something like +300,000, which seemed totally crazy. I turned that off, and found the beatnote somewhere around output of -10,300. So, I haven't gone to the end to look at the temperature, but it's going to be different than when Eric was taking measurements this afternoon. It seems like the main problem with the Xarm is poor mode matching - the maximized input pointing for TEM00, when you unlock and relock the cavity, is just as likely to give you a TEM_9_0 mode, as TEM00.
So, we gave up on the Xarm for the evening, and tried PRMI+1arm, with the new PRCL ASC. This was successful! The Yarm beatnote was around laser slow servo output of +4450. Beatnote at 46.0MHz, -26dBm. We found the IR resonance, moved off, locked the PRMI, transitioned to the new ASC, and brought the Yarm back to IR resonance. What we see is that the power fluctuations in the PRC are much smaller than they were back around Halloween (elog 9338), however the arm power fluctuations still seem very, very large. This is certainly partly due to the fact that we haven't done a thorough Yarm alignment since before messing with the greens, so we will have drifted somewhat. Also, the ALS beatnote sensor isn't perfect, so won't be perfect at holding us near resonance.
Den is thinking about whether we can use the arm transmission QPD signals to feed back to the ETM ASC servos, to try to reduce the RIN in the arms. I feel like we should also see if this amount of power fluctuation can be explained by our ALS noise, because maybe we'll be fine once we transition to IR and turn off the ALS system. Attached is a plot showing that the arm's RIN is coherent with the spot motion seen by the transmission QPD, so we need to check the alignment of the cavity, as well as consider using the trans QPD in an ASC feedback loop.
Here is a plot of the PRC sideband power, as well as the Yarm transmission. The GPS time for this plot is approximately 1070963372.

|
Attachment 2: try_dc.pdf
|
|
9463
|
Fri Dec 13 02:30:22 2013 |
Koji | Update | LSC | locking activity |
According to the measurement by Eric, the X-arm green PDH UGF is too low. We still have some room to increase the gain.
The out of loop stability of the ALS for each arm should be measured everyday.
Otherwise we can't tell whether the arm is prepared for advanced locking activities or not.
We expect to see the arm stablity of ~50pm_rms for the Y arm and ~150pm_rms for the X arm. |
9471
|
Sat Dec 14 02:51:47 2013 |
Den | Update | LSC | locking activity |
I had a look on x,y arms stabilization using ALS. Input green beam was misaligned and I was loosing 00 every few minutes. I vent on the floor and realigned green beams.
YARM alignemt was smooth - transmission increased from 0.4 to 0.85 with PSL shutter off.
XARM was tough. Steering mirrors did not have any derivatives when transmission power was 0.5. I walked the beam with piezos but got only 0.55. It seems that the input beam is mismatched to the cavity. When the transmission was 1 last time? Does anyone have a model of the xend table to compute mode matching?
Input green alignent was improved and I could keep arms stabilized for periods of ~30min - 1 hour. Still not forever.
I noticed that ALS_XARM and ALS_YARM servos have limiters of 6000 and control signal had high frequency components that were not rolled off as shown on the plot "ETMY_DRIVE". I have added a low pass filter that reduced RMS by factor of 5 and took 7 degrees of phase at UGF=150 Hz. Now margin is 33 degrees.
Then I excited ETMY longitudinally at 100 Hz and measured first and second harmonics of the YARM RIN. I got total DC offset of 0.3 nm. This means significant length coupling to RIN. First of all, "scan arm" script does not tune the offset very precise. I guess it looks at DC power, checks when cavity passes through symmetrical points of the resonance and takes the average. It is also useful to look at POX/POY and confirm that average is 0. Plot "ALS_RIN" shows comparison of YARM power fluctuations when it is locked using IR and stabilized using ALS. By manually correcting the offset I could reduce length coupling into RIN, coherence was ~0.1.
Cavity RMS motion also couples length to RIN. Plot "ALS_IR" shows YARM error signal. I also looked at POY signal (LSC-YARM_IN1) as an OOL sensor. At low frequencies POY sees only IMC length fluctuations converted to frequency. I have engaged MCL path and ALS error and LSC error signals overlaped. Cavity RMS motion is measured to be 200 pm. |
Attachment 1: ETMY_DRIVE.pdf
|
|
Attachment 2: ALS_RIN.pdf
|
|
Attachment 3: ALS_IR.pdf
|
|
9480
|
Tue Dec 17 02:10:29 2013 |
Den | Update | LSC | locking activity |
Koji, Den
Some results and conclusions from tonight:
PRC macroscopic length is detuned. We measured REFL phases in carrier and sideband configurations - they are different by ~45 degrees for both 11 and 55 MHz sidebands. Additional measurement with phase locked lasers is required.
We got stable lock of PRMI+2arms with CARM offset of ~200 pm. We think this is the point when we should transition to 1/sqrt(TR) signals. We plan to rewire LSC model and also test CM servo with 1 arm during the day.
POP ASC OL shape changes when we reduce CARM offset probably due to normalization by sum inside the PD. Servo gets almost useless when PRMI power fluctuates by a factor of few.
SMA cables were made and installed for the REFL165 RF amplifier in lsc rack. |
9853
|
Fri Apr 25 03:14:46 2014 |
ericq | Update | LSC | locking activity |
[ericq, Jenne, Zach]
We spent some time tonight trying to push our CARM locking further, to little avail. DARM/CARM loop oscillations kept sneaking up on us. We measured some MC2 motion -> REFL11 Transfer Functions to see if we could see CARM plant features; plots will come in the near future... |
9855
|
Fri Apr 25 13:18:08 2014 |
Dark Jamie | Update | LSC | locking activity |
Quote: |
[ericq, Jenne, Zach]
We spent some time tonight trying to push our CARM locking further, to little avail. DARM/CARM loop oscillations kept sneaking up on us. We measured some MC2 motion -> REFL11 Transfer Functions to see if we could see CARM plant features; plots will come in the near future...
|
Probably things would have worked better if you would have gotten your hair done at the same place as me. |
Attachment 1: m10008_f1_bg.jpg
|
|
5754
|
Fri Oct 28 05:17:13 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | LSC | locking activity : PZT1 is still railing |
Status update on the LSC activity:
To see how good/bad the beam pointing is, I locked the Y arm with POY11.
Then I ran the ASS servo to automatically correct the alignment of the ITMY and ETMY suspensions and also the beam pointing.
The result is that the PZT1_X is still railing to the negative side.
Due to it the transmitted light from the Y arm is about 0.6 or so which is supposed to be 1 if the beam pointing is perfect.
The EPICS value of PZT1_X is at the minimum of -10 and the ASS servo tried to push it more negative side.
Tomorrow night I will intentionally introduce offsets in the MC suspensions to avoid the railing.
The goal will be a scan of the incident beam while measuring the recycling gain. |
5474
|
Tue Sep 20 03:02:23 2011 |
Keiko | Update | LSC | locking activity tonight |
Keiko, Anamaria, Koji
We were not able to establish the stable DRMI tonight. We could lock MICH and PRCL quite OK, and lock the three degrees of freedom at somewhere strange for several seconds quite easily, but the proper DRMI lock was not obtained.
When MICH and PRC are locked to the carrier, REFL DC PD reading dropps from ~3000 counts to 2600~2700 counts as REFL beam is absorbed to PRC. We'll try to lock PRC to sidebands - but flipping gain sign didn't work today, although it worked a few days ago.
POP beam (monitor) is useful to align PRM. |
6080
|
Wed Dec 7 02:55:38 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | Green Locking | locking activity tonight |
No real progress.
Probably I spent a bit too much time realigning the beat-note optical path.
(what I did)
- Switched on a power supply which was supposed to give +/- 15V for the broadband beat-note PD.
The power supply had been somehow turned off.
- Realigned the beat-note path. When we installed the new EOM mount today, we moved some of the green steering mirrors to make a space.
So we had to realign the downstream of the beat-note path. After the realignment the DC output of the PD was about 120 mV and the signal level of the beat-note was at -20 dBm.
- Took noise spectrum of the beat-note with the arm cavity locked by the IR-PDH
The noise curve was almost the same as before (i.e. unknown high frequency white noise above 20 Hz and some low frequency noise which has structures at 1 and 3 Hz).
- Closed the ALS loop with the coarse sensor. But I was too lazy to go further more.
Quote from #6076 |
Tomorrow I will try :
(1) Using the fine sensor.
(2) Noise budgeting with the fine sensor.
|
|
6166
|
Wed Jan 4 03:03:24 2012 |
kiwamu | Update | LSC | locking activity tonight and beyond |
Last night and tonight, I was doing a kind of rehabilitation -- locking PRMI and DRMI with the new trigger system.
Although MC wasn't so awesome (#6164), I confirmed that the DRMI can stay locked with the conventional RFPD combination (#4760).
Additionally I have modified the IFO configure scripts, such that they also automatically restore the thresholds values for triggering.
The scripts are available in the C1IFO_CONFIGURE screen as usual.
Locking plan
Here is a plan in my mind and these are basically the details of the gantt chart (#6143):
- (1 day task) Measurement of the recycling gains of the RF sidebands with the PRMI and DRMI configuration, using POP22/110 RFPD.
- I need to have confidence that I am really locking the DRMI with SRC resonating to 55 MHz.
- Also those values will enable us to estimate losses and mode matching again (maybe ?).
- (3-4 days task) Measurement of the sensing matrix using the multiple-LOCKIN system.
- Write a script to automatically measure the sensing matrix. This must be easy.
- The results will enable us to diagonalize the input matrix and therefore it eventually gives more solid lock of the DRMI
- Also it will give us the optical gains of 3f signals. So this is actually a step toward the 3f signal check.
- (3-4 days task) Noise budgeting on the 3f signals
- This is a very important part of the DRMI characterization because the results will tell us whether we can hold the DRMI lock with a sufficient SNR or not.
- If it turns out that they don't have good SNRs, we then have to come up with some ideas to improve the SNRs.
- (Extra fun task depending on schedule) 3f DRMI lock + Y arm ALS
- If the beat-box electronics are not available by the time when the work above are completed, I will do this fun task.
- Probably it is better to start preparing the common mode servo electronics because it will be needed anyway.
|
429
|
Sun Apr 20 18:23:27 2008 |
rana | Summary | LSC | locking attempts |
I noticed that the adaptive FF for the MC had stopped doing anything; this turned out
to be that the MC lost lock and the mcdown script turned off the FF path to MC1.
Although there's no elog, it looks like there was ~60 attempts at locking the IFO
between 12:38 and 4:27 on Saturday afternoon. I'm attaching here a plot showing
lock attempt durations and a histogram of lock times. |
Attachment 1: quix.png
|
|
11513
|
Tue Aug 18 03:56:09 2015 |
ericq | Update | LSC | locking efforts |
Now that the updated ALS is stable, and the PRC angular FF is revived, I've been working on relocking PRFPMI. While the RMS arm fluctuations are surely smaller than they used to be, there is no noticible difference to the ears when buzzing around resonance, but this doesn't really mean much.
Frustratingly, I am not able to stably blend in any RF CARM error signal into the slow length control path (i.e. CARM_B). Bringing AS55 Q into DARM with the 20:0 integrator is working fine, but we really need to supress CARM to get anywhere. I'm not sure why this isn't working; poking around into the settings that were used when we were regularly locking didn't turn up any differences as far as I could tell. Investigations continue...
Some minor changes to the locking script were made, to account for the increased ALS displacement sensitivity from the longer delay line.
Since the ALS is now in a fairly stable state, I've updated the calibrated PSD template at /users/Templates/ALS/ALS_outOfLoop_Ref.xml , and added some coherence plots for some commonly coupled quantities (beat signal amplitude, IR error signal, green PDH error signal and green transmission).

 
|
Attachment 1: newALSref.pdf
|
|
Attachment 2: xCoh.pdf
|
|
Attachment 3: yCoh.pdf
|
|
4623
|
Wed May 4 13:45:56 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | LSC | locking last night |
Last night I was trying to calibrate the MICH error signal and the actuators on BS and ITMs.
However I gave up taking the data because the MC locking was unstable. MC3 drifted a lot. |
6471
|
Fri Mar 30 10:20:51 2012 |
kiwamu | Update | LSC | locking last night |
I was trying to make the DRMI lock more robust.
Increasing the gains of the oplev on SRM helped a lot, but the lock is still not solid enough for measurements.
According to some line injection tests, the SRCL and MICH signals show up in AS55Q with almost the same amplitudes.
I tried to diagonalize the input matrix (particularly MICH-SRCL in AS55) based on the result of the line injection tests, but I ran out the time.
Work continues. |
15045
|
Fri Nov 22 00:54:14 2019 |
gautam | Update | LSC | locking notes |
[KA, GV]
There was no shaking (that disturbed the locking) tonight!
- REFL165 Demod phase was adjusted from -111deg to -125deg. To minimize coherence b/w MICH and PRCL.
- MICH 3f loop gain changed to 0.3.
- If the POP mode shape looks weird, it probably means that the PRM is sligntly misaligned. Tweaking the alignment improves PRMI stability and also makes the arm buildup higher.
- Ditto for MICH - slightly touching up the BS alignment can lower ASDC.
- Main finding tonight was that the ALS noise seems to get degraded as a function of the CARM offset! As a result of this, CARM goes through several linewidths, and the arm transmission fluctuates wildly.
- We suspect some scattered light shenanigans. It is not clear to me why this is happening. Possibilities:
- Scattered ETM transmission somehow makes it into the fiber coupler and degrades the ALS noise.
- Sacttered ETM transmission makes it onto the Green PDH photodiode and degrades the ALS noise.
- Backscatter into the PSL degrades the ALS noise.
- Shadow sensors of either the ITMs, ETMs, BS, or PRM don't have 1064nm filters and get scatterd light, making the cavity length noise worse.
- Other possibilities?
The problem is hard to debug because we are feeding back on the ETMs, BS and PRM, and at the low CARM offset (= high PRG), all the DoFs are cross coupled strongly so just by looking at error/control signals, I can't directly determine where the noise is originating. The fact that the ALS CARM spectrum shows a noise increase suggests that the problem has to do with the test masses, PSL, IMC, or end green PDH setups.
My plan is to do a systematic campaign and eliminate some of these possibilities - e.g. install some baffling around the fiber coupler and the end green PDH photodiodes and see if there is any improvement in the situation.
* In attachment #1, the "Ref" traces are when the CARM offset is 0, and the arms are buzzing in and out of resonance. The non-reference traces are for when the CARM offset is ~28kHz (so several linewidths away from resonance). |
Attachment 1: ALSnoiseIncrease.pdf
|
|
4753
|
Fri May 20 03:01:17 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | LSC | locking status |
(PRMI locking)
Since REFL11 has gone I tried locking the PRMI with combination of REFL55 and AS55.
Without any pain the lock of PRMI was achieved successfully. AS55 was used to sense MICH and REFL55 was used for PRC.
(scripting)
Additionally I was modifying several scripts which are invoked from C1IFO_CONFIGURE.adl. Some details about the scripts will be uploaded on the wiki later.
An important thing is that now we are able to use the "restore" commands for the Y arm, X arm, Michelson and PRM locking.
The scripts will automatically acquire the lock of each DOF. The image below is just a screen shot of the medm screen where you can call the scripts.

( Still to do)
* PRM actuator response measurement
* PRC noise budget
* MICH-PRC actuator decoupling |
5040
|
Wed Jul 27 01:58:23 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | LSC | locking status |
Through some locking exercise I found that several things are degrading.
Remember the interferometer is like a cat, so we have to feed and take care of her everyday. (Otherwise the cat will be dead !)
Beam axis:
I guess that the beam axis has changed a lot to the horizontal direction.
The beam spots on the REFL and AS camera looked off-centered by a size of the spot.
The beam axis has to be well-aligned before the vent.
Locking of the Arms :
didn't lock at all. It could be a problem of the demodulation phase on AS55.
Also the TRY camera looked pretty much off-centered. The spot is already getting out from the field of view.
We have to fix this issue, otherwise we cannot align the beam axis.
Locking of PRM :
Sort of okay, I was able to lock both MICH and PRCL although I had to flip the sign of the MICH control gain due to the demod-phase change.
The suspensions don't look healthy. The beam spots on the REFL and AS camera move a lot even without any length feedback.
It means some of the suspensions are shaky. |
5041
|
Wed Jul 27 08:59:10 2011 |
Suresh | Update | LSC | locking status |
I had to realign PSL beam into the MC in order to reobtain the MC lock. We lost lock at sometime around 8:30 AM on Tuesday. See attached trend data for MC_RFPD_DCMON.
The is the second time this week that I had to do this when we were unable to obtain the MC lock. On both occassions the zig-zag at the end of the PSL table was tweaked to minimise the MC_RFPD_DCMON.

We have been using the MC as a Beam Axis Reference. And therefore we are adjusting the PSL beam to maximise coupling into MC. However if MC's beam axis has shifted, then would it not be best to use the pzt's to re-obtain coupling into the arm cavities?
Quote from #5040 |
Beam axis:
I guess that the beam axis has changed a lot to the horizontal direction.
The beam spots on the REFL and AS camera looked off-centered by a size of the spot.
The beam axis has to be well-aligned before the vent.
|
|
5043
|
Wed Jul 27 10:10:12 2011 |
steve | Update | PSL | locking status |
80 days: PMC is drifting |
Attachment 1: 80dpmcMC.jpg
|
|
5665
|
Fri Oct 14 04:35:45 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | LSC | locking tonight |
The lock of DRMI wasn't stable enough to measure the sensing matrix. Failed.    
PRMI and SRMI were okay and in fact they could stay locked robustly for a long time.
I added a new option in the C1IFO_CONFIGURE screen so that one can choose Signal-Recycled Michelson in carrier resonant condition.

Additionally the orthogonalization of the I-Q signals on REFL55 should be done because it hasn't been done.
|
442
|
Thu Apr 24 14:10:26 2008 |
rob | Update | Locking | locking work |
Rob, Johnnie
We made some progress on locking last night (Wed night), namely that we were able to handoff (briefly) the CARM-MCL path the REFL-DC error signal. We tried this because we suspect that the reason the PO-DC is not a good CARM error signal is because at low powers, the dc light level in the recycling cavity is dominated by the +f2 RF sideband. Thus, REFL-DC should work a bit better at low powers, which it did. It wasn't super stable, though, so this will require a bit of work to make the transition reliable & stable. The next things to work on include setting the AO path gain properly and possibly going to higher arm powers before handing off (thus increasing the discriminant).
Another thing we found is that the alignment scripts are not working in an ideal fashion. Running the alignment scripts for the two arms (XARM & YARM) leaves the Michelson badly misaligned, making it impossible to get good DRM alignment. This will have to be fixed. |
3773
|
Sun Oct 24 19:55:50 2010 |
kiwamu | Update | Electronics | lonely RF amplifier on ITMX table |
(Rana, Kiwamu)
Last Friday we found a lonely RF amplifier ZHL-3A on the ITMX table.
When we found him we were very sad because he's been setup unacceptably
For example, the signal input was disconnected although a 24V DC was still applied. So he has been making just a heat for a long time.
The power connector was a BNC style which is not official way.
The leg of a decoupling capacitor attached to the DC connector was apparently broken and etc,..
We salvaged him and then cleaned up those cables and the DC power supply.
We don't say like 'don't make a temporary setup', but please clean up them after finishing the work every time. |
12385
|
Tue Aug 9 13:53:57 2016 |
babbott | Update | SEI | long Guralp EX cable repaired on the D-sub side |
I checked out the cable that I took from you, and all of the connections looked right. The only thing I did notice was that some of the soldered wires on the 37-pin connector had gotten hot enough to melt their insulation, and potentially short together. I cut off that connector, and left it on your desk to check out. I put on a new connector, and checked the pinout. If the Guralps still doesn't work, we'll have to check out other possibilities. |
685
|
Wed Jul 16 17:51:58 2008 |
Masha | Update | Auxiliary locking | long measurement |
I'm taking a measurement on the SR785 spectrum analyzer at low frequencies, so I'm going to leave it by the symmetric port table for a while. Please don't move it! |
686
|
Wed Jul 16 22:29:05 2008 |
Masha | Update | Auxiliary locking | long measurement |
Quote: | I'm taking a measurement on the SR785 spectrum analyzer at low frequencies, so I'm going to leave it by the symmetric port table for a while. Please don't move it! |
all done thanks. |
2312
|
Mon Nov 23 10:11:03 2009 |
steve | Update | PEM | long term temp fluctuation of the 40m lab |
Quote: |
This first plot shows the RC temperature channels' performance from 40 days ago, before we disabled the MINCO PID controller. Although RCTEMP is supposed to be the out of loop sensor, what we really care about is the cavity length and so I've plotted the SLOW. To get the SLOW on the same scale, I've multiplied the channel by 10 and then adjusted the offset to get it on the same scale.
The second plot shows a period after that where there is no temperature control of the can at all. Same gain scaling has been applied to SLOW as above, so that instead of the usual 1 GHz/V this plot shows it in 0.1 GHz/V.
The third plot shows it after the new PID was setup.
Summary: Even though the PID loop has more gain, the true limit to the daily fluctuations in the cavity temperature and the laser frequency are due to the in-loop sensors measuring the wrong thing. i.e. the out-of-loop temperature is too different from the in-loop sensor. This can possibly be cured with better foam and better placement of the temperature sensors. Its possible that we're now just limited by the temperature gradients on the can.
|
Here is a 7 years plot of of the 40m temperature variations. |
Attachment 1: 7ytemp.jpg
|
|
4801
|
Thu Jun 9 18:25:22 2011 |
kiwamu | HowTo | CDS | look back a channel which doesn' exist any more |
For some purposes I looked back the data of some channels which don't exist any more. Here I explain how to do it.
If this method is not listed on the wiki, I will put this instruction on a wiki page.
(How to)
(1) Edit an "ini" file which is not associated to the real-time control (e.g. IOP_SLOW.ini)
(2) In the file, write a channel name which you are interested in. The channel name should be bracketed like the other existing channels.
example: [C1:LSC-REFL11_I_OUT_DAQ]
(3) Define the data rate. If you want to look at the full data, write
datarate = 2048
just blow each channel name.
Or if you want to look at only the trends, don't write anything.
(4) Save the ini file and restart fb. If necessary hit "DAQ Reload" button on a C1:AAA_GDS_TP.adl screen to make the indicators green.
(5) Now you should be able to look at the data for example by dataviewer.
(6) After you finish the job, don't forget to clean up the sentences that you put in the ini file because it will always show up on the channel list on dtt and is just confusing.
Also don't forget to restart fb to reflect the change. |
8524
|
Thu May 2 19:59:34 2013 |
Jamie | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | lookback: new program to look at recent past testpoint data |
To aid in lock-loss studies, I made a new program called 'lookback', similar to 'getdata', to look at past data.
When called with channel name arguments, it runs continuously, storing all channel data in a ring buffer. When the user hits Ctrl-C, all the data in the ring buffer is displayed. There is an option to store the data in the ring buffer to disk as well.
controls@rosalba:/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/general 0$ ./lookback -h
usage: lookback [-h] [-l LENGTH] [-o OUTDIR] channel [channel ...]
Lookback on testpoint data. The specified amount of data is stored in a ring
buffer. When Ctrl-C is hit, all data in the ring buffer is plotted. Both 'DQ'
and 'online' test point data is available. Use NDSSERVER environment variable
to specify host:port.
positional arguments:
channel Acquisition channel. Multiple channels may be
specified and acquired at once.
optional arguments:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
-l LENGTH, --lookback LENGTH
Lookback time in seconds. This amount of data will be
stored in a ring buffer, and plotted on Ctrl-C.
Default is 10 seconds
-o OUTDIR, --outdir OUTDIR
Output directory to write data (will be created if it
doesn't exist). Data from each channel stored as
'<channel>.txt'. Any existing data files will be
overwritten.
controls@rosalba:/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/general 0$
|
4692
|
Wed May 11 17:20:24 2011 |
kiwamu | Configuration | IOO | loop diabled on PZT2 |
[Valera / Kiwamu]
The pointing of the incident beam to the interferometer has been jumping frequently.
Due to this jump the lock of the Y arm didn't stay for more than 2 min.
We turned off the strain gauge loop of PZT2-YAW and PZT2-PITCH, then the spot motion became solid and the Y arm locking became much more robust. |
2105
|
Fri Oct 16 16:08:00 2009 |
rob | Configuration | ASC | loop opened on PZT2 YAW at 3:40 pm |
I pushed the "closed loop" button on PZT2 YAW around 3:40 pm today, then roughly recentered it using the DC Offset knob on the PiezoJena controller and the IP ANG QPD readbacks. There was a large DC shift. We'll watch and see how much it drifts in this state. |
2107
|
Fri Oct 16 18:46:36 2009 |
rana | Configuration | ASC | loop opened on PZT2 YAW at 3:40 pm |
Quote: |
I pushed the "closed loop" button on PZT2 YAW around 3:40 pm today, then roughly recentered it using the DC Offset knob on the PiezoJena controller and the IP ANG QPD readbacks. There was a large DC shift. We'll watch and see how much it drifts in this state.
|
Here's the trend.
The transient at ~22:40 is Rob switching to 'Open Loop' on the Piezo Jena PZTs. I don't see any qualitative change in the drift after this event.
At 05:55 UTC, I removed an iris that was blocking the IP POS beam (the sum goes up from 2 to 6.5) without disturbing the mirrors who's oplev beam are on that table. Steve has conceded one sugar Napoleon after betting against my ninja-like iris skills.
We should recenter the beam on IP POS now that its unclipped - I'll let it sit this way overnight just to get more drift data. |
Attachment 1: Untitled.png
|
|
2109
|
Sun Oct 18 16:09:34 2009 |
rana | Configuration | ASC | loop opened on PZT2 YAW at 3:40 pm |
I wanted to see how long our IP POS beam has been badly clipped - turns out its since April 1, 2007.
Steve's April Fool's joke is chronicled then. The attached trend shows that the drop in IP POS is coincident with that event.
In trying to align IPPOS, I noticed that someone has placed a ND2.0 filter (factor of 100 attenuation) in front of it. This is kind of a waste - I have removed IPPOS to fix its resistors and avoid this bad optic. Also the beam coming onto the table is too big for the 1" diameter optics being used; we need to replace it with a 2" diamter optic (Y1-2037-45P).
IP ANG dropped by a factor of 2 back in early August of '08.
We need this guy on the investigation:
|
Attachment 1: a.png
|
|
4752
|
Fri May 20 01:02:50 2011 |
loose connection hunter | Update | SUS | loose connection on ETMY rack |
The UL signal of the shadow sensor on ETMY went to zero this evening.
This was due to a loose connection on the cross connection board on the 1Y4 rack.
In order to make them tighten, a combination of stand-offs and screws were installed on the connectors. They won't be loose any more.

|
14290
|
Mon Nov 12 13:53:20 2018 |
rana | Update | IOO | loss measurement: oscope vs CDS DAQ |
sstop using the ssscope, and just put the ssssignal into the DAQ with sssssome whitening. You'll get 16 bitsśšß.
Quote: |
I increased the resolution on the scope by selecting Average (512) mode. I was a bit confused by this, since Yuki was correct that I had only 4 digits recorded over ethernet, which made me think this was an i/o setting. However the sample acquisition setting was the only thing I could find on the tektronix scope or in its manual about improving vertical resolution. This didn't change the saved file, but I found the more extensive programming manual for the scope, which confirms that using average mode does increase the resolution... from 9 to 14 bits! I'm not even getting that many.
|
|
35
|
Wed Oct 31 08:34:35 2007 |
rana | Other | IOO | loss measurements |
In the end, we were unable to get a good scatter measurement just because we ran out of steam. The idea was to get a frame
grab image of MC2 but that involves getting an unsaturated image.
In the end we settle for the ringdowns, Rob's (so far unlogged) cavity pole measurement, and the MC transmission numbers. They
all point to ~100-150 ppm scatter loss per mirror. We'll see what happens after wiping. |
14243
|
Thu Oct 11 13:40:51 2018 |
yuki | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss measurements |
Quote: |
This is the procedure I follow when I take these measurements for the XARM (symmetric under XARM <-> YARM):
- Dither-align the interferometer with both arms locked. Freeze outputs when done.
- Misalign ETMY + ITMY.
- ITMY needs to be misaligned further. Moving the slider by at least +0.2 is plentiful to not have the other beam interfere with the measurement.
- Start the script, which does the following:
- Resume dithering of the XARM
- Check XARM dither error signal rms with CDS. If they're calm enough, proceed.
- Freeze dithering
- Start a new set of averages on the scope, wait T_WAIT (5 seconds)
- Read data (= ASDC power and MC2 trans) from scope and save
- Misalign ETMX and wait 5s
- Read data from scope and save
- Repeat desired amount of times
- Close the PSL shutter and measure the PD dark levels
|
Information for the armloss measurement:
- Script which gets the data: /users/johannes/40m/armloss/scripts/armloss_scope/armloss_dcrefl_asdcpd_scope.py
- Script which calculates the loss: /users/johannes/40m/armloss/scripts/misc/armloss_AS_calc.py
- Before doing the procedure Johannes wrote you have to prepare as follows:
- put a PD in anti-symmetric beam path to get ASDC signal.
- put a PD in MC2 box to get tranmitted light of IMC. It is used to normalize the beam power.
- connect those 2 PDs to oscilloscope and insert an internet cable to it.
- Usage: python2 armloss_dcrefl_asdcpd_scope.py [IP address of Scope] [ScopeCH for AS] [ScopeCH for MC] [Num of iteration] [ArmMode]
Note: The scripts uses httplib2 module. You have to install it if you don't have.
The locked arms are needed to calculate armloss but the alignment of PMC is deadly bad now. So at first I will make it aligned. (Gautam aligned it and PMC is locked now.)
gautam: The PMC alignment was fine, the problem was that the c1psl slow machine had become unresponsive, which prevented the PMC length servo from functioning correctly. I rebooted the machine and undid the alignment changes Yuki had made on the PSL table. |
14245
|
Fri Oct 12 12:29:34 2018 |
yuki | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss measurements |
With Gautam's help, Y-arm was locked. Then I ran the script "armloss_dcrefl_asdcpd_scope.py" which gets the signals from oscilloscope. It ran and got data, but I found some problems.
- It seemed that a process which makes arm cavity mislaigned in the script didn't work.
- The script "armloss_dcrefl_asdcpd_scope.py" gets the signal and the another script "armloss_AS_calc.py" calculates the arm loss. But output file the former makes doesn't match with the type the latter requires. A script converts format is needed.
Anyway, I got the data needed so I will calculate the loss after converting the format. |
14248
|
Fri Oct 12 20:20:29 2018 |
yuki | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss measurements |
I ran the script for measuring arm-loss and calculated rough Y-arm round trip loss temporally. The result was 89.6ppm. (The error should be considered later.)
The measurement was done as follows:
- install hardware
- Put a PD (PDA520) in anti-symmetric beam path to get ASDC signal.
- Use a PD (PDA255) in MC2 box to get tranmitted light of IMC. It is used to normalize the beam power.
- Connect those 2 PDs to oscilloscope (IP: 192.168.113.25) and insert an internet cable to it.
- measure DARK noise
- Block beam going into PDs with dampers and turn off the room light.
- Run the script "armloss_dcrefl_acdcpd_scope.py" using "DARK" mode.
- measure the ASDC power when Y-arm locked and misaligned
- Remove dampers and turn off the room light.
- Dither-align the interferometer with both arms locked. Freeze outputs when done. (Click C1ASS.adl>!MoreScripts>ON and click C1ASS.adl>!MoreScripts>FreezeOutputs.)
- Misalign ETMX + ITMX. (Just click "Misalign" button.)
- Further misalign ITMX with the slider. (see previous study: ITMX needs to be misaligned further. Moving the slider by at least +0.2 is plentiful to not have the other beam interfere with the measurement.)
- Start the script "armloss_dcrefl_acdcpd_scope.py" using "ETMY" mode, which does the following:
- Resume dithering of the YARM.
- Check YARM dither error signal rms with CDS. If they're calm enough, proceed. (In the previous study the rms threshold was 0.7. Now "ETM_YAW_L_DEMOD_I" signal was 15 (noisy), then the threshold was set 17.)
- Freeze dithering.
- Start a new set of averages on the scope, wait T_WAIT (5 seconds).
- Read data (= ASDC power and MC2 trans) from scope and save.
- Misalign ETMY and wait 5s. (I added a code which switchs LSC mode ON and OFF.)
- Read data from scope and save.
- Repeat desired amount of times.
- calculate the arm loss
- Start the script "armloss_AS_calc.py", whose content is follows:
- requires given parameters: Mode-Matching effeciency, modulation depth, transmissivity. I used the same value as Johannes did last year, which are (huga)
- reads datafile of beam power at ASDC and MC2 trans, which file is created by "armloss_dcrefl_acdcpd_scope.py".
- calculates arm loss from the equation (see 12528 and 12854).
Result:
YARM
('AS_DARK =', '0.0019517200000000003') #dark noise at ASDC
('MC_DARK =', '0.02792') #dark noise at MC2 trans
('AS_LOCKED =', '2.04293') #beam power at ASDC when the cavity was locked
('MC_LOCKED =', '2.6951620000000003')
('AS_MISALIGNED =', '2.0445439999999997') #beam power at ASDC when the cavity was misaligned
('MC_MISALIGNED =', '2.665312')
#normalized beam power

Comments:
- "ETM_YAW_L_DEMOD_I_OUTPUT" was little noisy even when the arm was locked.
- The reflected beam power when locked was higher than when misaligned. It seemed strange for me at first. Johannes suggested that it was caused by over-coupling cavity. It is possible when r_{ETMY}>>r1_{ITMY}.
- My first (wrong) measurement said the arm loss was negative(!). That was caused by lack of enough misalignment of another arm mirrors. If you don't misalign ITMX enough then the beam or scattered light from X-arm would bring bad. The calculated negative loss would be appeared only when

- Error should be considered.
- Parameters given this time should be measured again.
|
14251
|
Sat Oct 13 20:11:10 2018 |
yuki | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss measurements |
Quote: |
the script "armloss_AS_calc.py",
- "ETM_YAW_L_DEMOD_I_OUTPUT" was little noisy even when the arm was locked.
- The reflected beam power when locked was higher than when misaligned. It seemed strange for me at first. Johannes suggested that it was caused by over-coupling cavity. It is possible when r_{ETMY}>>r1_{ITMY}.
|
Some changes were made in the script for getting the signals of beam power:
- The script sees "C1:ASS-X(Y)ARM_ETM_PIT/YAW_L_DEMOD_I_OUTPUT" and stops running until the signals become small, however some offset could be on the signal. So I changed it into waiting until (DEMOD - OFFSET) becomes small. (Yesterday I wrote ETM_YAW_L_DEMOD_I_OUTPUT was about 15 and was little noisy. I was wrong. That was just a offset value.)
- I added a code which stops running the script when the power of transmitted IR beam is low. You can set this threshold. The nominal value of "C1:LSC-TRX(Y)_OUT16" is 1.2 (1.0), so the threshold is set 0.8 now.
In the yesterday measurement the beam power of ASDC is higher when locked than when misaligned and I wrote it maybe caused by over-coupled cavity. Then I did a calculation as following to explain this:
- assume power transmissivity of ITM and ETM are 1.4e-2 and 1.4e-5.
- assume loss-less mirror, you can calculate amplitude reflectivity of ITM and ETM.
- consider a cavity which consists two mirrors and is loss-less, then
holds. r1 and r2 are amplitude reflectivity of ITM and ETM, and E is electric filed.
- Then you can calculate the power of reflected beam when resonated and when anti-resonated. The fraction of these value is
, which is smaller than 1.
- I found this calculation was wrong! Above calculatation only holds when cavity is aligned, not when misaligned. 99.04% of incident beam power reflects when locked, and (100-1.4)% reflects when misaligned. The proportion is P(locked)/P(misaligned)=1.004, higher than 1.
|
14254
|
Mon Oct 15 10:32:13 2018 |
yuki | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss measurements |
I used these values for measuring armloss:
- Transmissivitity of ITM = 1.384e-2 * (1 +/- 1e-2)
- Transmissivitity of ETM = 13.7e-6 * (1 +/- 5e-2)
- Mode-Matching efficiency of XARM = 0.912 * (1 +/- 2e-2)
- Mode-Matching efficiency of YARM = 0.867 * (1 +/- 2e-2)
- modulation depth m1 (11MHz) = 0.179 * (1 +/- 2e-2)
- modulation depth m2 = 0.226 * (1 +/- 2e-2),
then the uncertainties reported by the individual measurements are on the order of 6 ppm (~6.2 for the XARM, ~6.3 for the YARM). This accounts for fluctuations of the data read from the scope and uncertainties in mode-matching and modulation depths in the EOM. I made histograms for the 20 datapoints taken for each arm: the standard deviation of the spread is over 6ppm. We end up with something like:
XARM: 123 +/- 50 ppm
YARM: 152+/- 50 ppm
This result has about 40% of uncertaintities in XARM and 33% in YARM (so big... ).
In the previous measurement, the fluctuation of each power was 0.1% and the fluctuation of P(Locked)/P(misaligned) was also 0.1%. Then the uncertainty was small. On the other hand in my measurement, the fluctuation of power is about 2% and the fluctuation of P(Locked)/P(misaligned) is 2%. That's why the uncertainty became big.
We want to measure tiny value of loss (~100ppm). So the fluctuation of P(Locked)/P(misaligned) must be smaller than 1.6%.
(Edit on 10/23)
I think the error is dominated by systematic error in scope. The data of beam power had only 3 degits. If P(Locked) and P(misaligned) have 2% error, then
.
You have to check the configuration of scope. |
Attachment 1: XARM_20181015_1500.pdf
|
|
Attachment 2: YARM_20181015_1500.pdf
|
|
14258
|
Tue Oct 16 00:44:29 2018 |
yuki | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss measurements |
The scripts for measuring armloss are in the directory "/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/lossmap_scripts/armloss_scope".
- armloss_derefl_asdcpd_scope.py: gets data and makes ascii file.
- armloss_AS_calc.py: calculates armloss from selected a set of files.
- armloss_calc_histogram.py: calculates armloss from selected files and makes histogram.
|
14269
|
Fri Nov 2 19:25:16 2018 |
gautam | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss measurements |
Some facts which should be considered when doing this measurement and the associated uncertainty:
- When Johannes did the measurement, there was no light from the AS port diverted to the OMC. This represents ~70% loss in the absolute amount of power available for this measurement. I estimate ~1W*Tprm * Ritm * Tbs * Rbs * Tsrm * OMCsplit ~ 300uW which should still be plenty, but the real parameter of interest is the difference in reflected power between locked/no cavity situations, and how that compares to the RMS of the scope readout. For comparison, the POX DC light level is expected to be ~20uW, assuming a 600ppm AR coating on the ITMs.
- Even though the reflection from the arm not being measured may look like it's completely misaligned looking at the AS camera, the PDA520 which is used at the AS port has a large active area and so one must check on the oscilloscope that the other arm is truly misaligned and not hitting the photodiode to avoid interference effects artifically bloating the uncertainty.
- The PDA255 monitoring the MC transmission has a tiny active area. I'm not sure the beam has been centered on it anytime recently. If the beam is not well centered on that PD, and you normalize the measurements by "MC Transmission", you're likely to end up with larger error.
Quote: |
This result has about 40% of uncertaintities in XARM and 33% in YARM (so big... ).
|
|
12874
|
Wed Mar 8 18:18:51 2017 |
johannes | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss script |
I started a loss script on Donatella that will scan the beam spot across ETMY, recording the reflected power from the arm via the networked scope at the AS port until later tonight (should be done by 9 pm). ITMX is currently strongly misaligned for this, but can be restored with the saved values. I mostly adapted the mapping scipts for the scope readout but still have to iron out a few kinks, which is why I'm running this test. In particular, I still need to calibrate how much the spot actually moves on the optic and control the ASS demodulation offsets to keep the beam stationary on ITMY. |
12879
|
Thu Mar 9 22:28:11 2017 |
johannes | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss script |
loss map script running on Rossa that moves the beam on ETMX. Yarm was misaligned for this, most recent PIT and YAW settings were saved beforehand. This will take until late at night, I estimate 2-3 am.
Quote: |
I started a loss script on Donatella that will scan the beam spot across ETMY, recording the reflected power from the arm via the networked scope at the AS port until later tonight (should be done by 9 pm). ITMX is currently strongly misaligned for this, but can be restored with the saved values. I mostly adapted the mapping scipts for the scope readout but still have to iron out a few kinks, which is why I'm running this test. In particular, I still need to calibrate how much the spot actually moves on the optic and control the ASS demodulation offsets to keep the beam stationary on ITMY.
|
|
12880
|
Fri Mar 10 11:37:25 2017 |
gautam | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss script |
This was still running at ~9.30am today morning, at which point I manually terminated it after confirming with Johannes that it was okay to do so. Judging by the StripTool traces in the control room, the mode cleaner remained locked for most of the night, there should be plenty of usable data...
Note that I re-aligned the Y-arm (to experiment further with photo-taking) at about 9.30am, so the data after this time should be disregarded...
Quote: |
loss map script running on Rossa that moves the beam on ETMX. Yarm was misaligned for this, most recent PIT and YAW settings were saved beforehand. This will take until late at night, I estimate 2-3 am.
|
|
12882
|
Fri Mar 10 19:48:56 2017 |
johannes | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss script |
Loss script running again, on Pianosa this time. Due to an oversight in the code the beam wasn't actually moved across ETMY last night. This time I confirmed that the correct offset value is written as a demodulation parameter to the correct mirror degree of freedom. Script will probably run through the night. Yarm is currently misaligned but previous alignment was saved. |
12883
|
Sat Mar 11 20:11:58 2017 |
johannes | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | loss script |
Yarm script running on Pianosa. Still working on visualization of the ETMX lossmap.
Quote: |
Loss script running again, on Pianosa this time. Due to an oversight in the code the beam wasn't actually moved across ETMY last night. This time I confirmed that the correct offset value is written as a demodulation parameter to the correct mirror degree of freedom. Script will probably run through the night. Yarm is currently misaligned but previous alignment was saved.
|
|
13307
|
Mon Sep 11 12:56:40 2017 |
johannes | Update | Computer Scripts / Programs | lossmap attempts |
I was trying to get a lossmap measurement over the weekend but had some trouble first with the IMC and then with the PMC.
For the IMC: It was a bit too misaligned to catch and maintain lock, but I had a hard time improving the alignment by hand. Fortunately, turning on the WFS quickly once it was locked restored the transmission to nominal levels and made it maintain the lock for longer, but only for several minutes, not enough for a lossmap scan (can take up to an hour). Using the WFS information I manually realigned the IMC, which made locking easier but wouldn't help with staying locked.
For the PMC: The PZT feedback signal had railed and the PMC had been unlocked for 8+ hours. The PMC medm screen controls were generally responsive (I could see the modes on the CCDs changing) but I just couldn't get it locked. c1psl was responding to ping but refusing telnet so I keyed the crate, followed by a burt restore and finally it worked.
After the PMC came back the IMC has already maintained lock for more than an hour, so I'm now running the first lossmap measurements. |
239
|
Tue Jan 15 13:15:27 2008 |
tobin | Update | Environment | lots of noise |
They're throwing concrete around at the construction site. |