40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 145 of 341 Not logged in
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
8346   Mon Mar 25 23:27:26 2013 ChloeUpdate QPD Circuit

In order to test the mount vibrations, I will likely try and make a different circuit work (with the summing/subtracting on an external breadboard) and designing an optimal circuit will be a side project. This is the circuit with the power supply Rana came up with, and the design I had in mind for the rest of the circuit. In my free time, I will try to figure out what parts to get that reduce noise and slowly work on building this, since it would be useful to have in the lab.

https://www.circuitlab.com/circuit/7sx995/qpd-circuit/#postsave_access_control_settings

8873   Thu Jul 18 19:09:08 2013 gautamConfigurationendtable upgradeQPD Calibration for PZT Calibration

Summary

I have been working on setting up a QPD which can eventually be used to calibrate the PZT, and also orient the PZT in the mount such that the pitch and yaw axes roughly coincide with the vertical and horizontal.

The calibration constants have been determined to be:

X-axis: -3.69 V/mm

Y-axis: -3.70V/mm

Methodology:

I initially tried using the QPD setup left behind by Chloe near MC2, but this turned out to be dysfunctional. On opening out the QPD, I found that the internal circuitry had some issues (shorts in the wrong places etc.) Fortunately, Steve was able to hand me another working unit. For future reference, there are a bunch of old QPDs which I assume are functional in the cabinet marked 'Old PDs' along the Y-arm.

I then made a circuit with which to read out the X and Y coordinates from the QPD. This consists of 4 buffer amplifiers (one for each quadrant), and 3 summing amplifiers (outputs are A+B+C+D = sum, B+C-A-D = Y-coordinate, and A+B-C-D = X-coordinate) that take the appropriate linear combinations of the 4 quadrants to output a voltage that may be calibrated against displacement of the QPD.

The output from the QPD is via a sub-D connector on the side of the pomona box enclosing the PD and the circuitry, with 7 pins- 3 for power lines, and 4 for the 4 quadrants of the QPD. It was a little tricky to figure the pin-out for this connector, as there was no way to use continuity checking to map the pins to quadrants. Therefore, I used a laser pointer, and some trial and error (i.e. shine the light on a given quadrant, and check the sign of the X and Y voltages on an oscilloscope) to map the pin outs. Steve tells me that these QPDs were made long before colour code standardisation, but I note here the pin outs in any case for future reference (the quadrant orientations are w.r.t the QPD held with all the circuitry above it, with the active surface facing me):

Red= +Vcc

Black= -Vcc

Green = GND

Chloe had noted that there was some issue with the voltage regulators on her circuit (overheating) but I suspect this may have been due to the faulty internal circuitry. Also, she had used 12 V regulators. I checked the datasheet of the QPD, Op-Amp LF347 (inside the pomona box) and the OP27s on my circuit, and found that they all had absolute maximum ratings above 18V, so I used 15V voltage regulators. The overheating problem was not a problem anymore.

I then proceeded to arrange a set up for the calibration (initially on the optical bench next to MC2, but now relocated to the SP table, and a cart adjacent to it). It consists of the following:

• He-Ne laser source
• Y2 2-inch mirror (AR and HR coated for 532nm) glued onto the PZT and mounted on a machined Newport U100P  - see this elog for details.
• QPD mounted on a translational stage whose micrometers are calibrated in tenths of an inch (in the plots I have scaled this to mm)
• A neutral density filter (ND = 2.0) which I added so that the QPD amplifier output did not saturate. I considered using a lens as well to reduce the spot size on the QPD but found that after adding the ND filter, it was reasonably small.
• High-voltage power supply (on cart)
• Two SR power supplies (for the PZT driver board and my QPD amplifier
• SR function generator
• Laser power source
• Two oscilloscopes
• Breadboard holding my QPD amplifier circuit

Having set everything up and having done the coarse alignment using the mirror mount, I proceeded to calibrate the X and Y axes of the QPD using the translational stage. The steps I followed were:

• Centre spot on QPD using coarse adjustment on the mirror mount: I gauged this by monitoring the X and Y voltage outputs on an oscilloscope, and adjusted things till both these went to zero.
• Used the tilt knob on the translational stage to roughly decouple the X and Y motion of the QPD.
• Kept Y-coordinate fixed, took the X-coordinate to close to its maximum value (I gauged this by checking where the voltage stopped changing appreciably for changes in the QPD position.
• Using this as a starting point, I moved the QPD through its X range, noting voltage output of the X-coordinate (and also the Y) on an oscilloscope.
• Repeated the procedure for the Y-coordinate.
• Analysis follows largely what was done in these elogs. I am attaching the script I used to fit an error function to the datapoints, this is something MATLAB should seriously include in cftool (note that it is VERY sensitive to the initial guess. I had to do quite a bit of guessing).

The plots are attached, from which the calibration values cited above are deduced. The linear fits for the orthogonal axis were done using cftool. There is some residual coupling between the X and Y motions of the QPD, but I think this os okay my purposes.

My next step would be to first tweak the orientation of the PZT in the mount while applying a small excitation to it in order to decouple the pitch and yaw motion as best as possible. Once this is done, I can go ahead and calibrate the angular motion of the PZT in mrad/V.

X-Axis                                                                                                                                Y-axis

Attachment 3: Error_Function_Fitting.zip
8233   Tue Mar 5 17:23:06 2013 ChloeUpdate QPD Adding/Subtracting Circuit

Today I finished building the adding/subtracting circuit for the QPD and tested that the QPD could see a laser moving across its visual field for both pitch and yaw. It didn't seem to behave weirdly (saturate) at the edges, but I need to test this more carefully to be sure.

However, this circuit uses many op amps, which will cause problems for building the actual circuit to fit into the QPD box. I am trying to figure out how to do this with fewer op amps (both with a quad op amp for amplifying the signals from the QPD and by summing/subtracting the signals with a single op amp instead of 3).

I finally got around to asking Steve to order more breadboards! Trying to determine what would be a good QPD to order for the final circuit, since we do not have any unmounted QPDs that aren't ancient. I'll read up on things I don't know enough about (namely op amps).

10920   Mon Jan 19 18:27:16 2015 ericqUpdateASCQPD ASC saga continues.

# Herein, I will try to paint a more thorough picture of this whole QPD ASC mess.

## Motivation for QPD ASC loops:

• We would like to use the QPDs as a DC arm pointing reference during locking attempts, or over multiple days, if possible.
• It would be nice if the QPDs could complement the oplevs to reduce angular motion of the cavity.
• We must not make the single arm longnitudinal noise or RIN worse, because anything observable in the single arm case will be catastrophic at full sensitivity

## Actuation design:

As mentioned in a previous ELOG, in single arm lock, I measured the QPD response with respect to the calibrated oplev signals. They were:

YARM ETMY: QPD PIT / OPLEV PIT =   22.0 count/urad       QPD YAW / OPLEV YAW =   17.1 count/urad ITMY: QPD PIT / OPLEV PIT =   -6.0 count/urad       QPD YAW / OPLEV YAW =    5.9 count/urad
XARM ETMX: QPD PIT / OPLEV PIT = 16.6 count/urad       QPD YAW / OPLEV YAW = -9.3 count/urad ITMX: QPD PIT / OPLEV PIT =  4.0 count/urad       QPD YAW / OPLEV YAW = -6.0 count/urad

For reference, one microradian of either ITM or ETM motion produces about 60um of ETM beam spot displacement, compared to the spot size of ~5mm.

However, given the lenses on the end tables that are used for green mode matching, that the IR transmitted beam also passes through, the QPDs are not directly imaging the ETM spot position; if they were, they would have equal sensitivity to ITM and ETM motion due to our flat/curved arm geometry.

From this data, I calculated the actuation coefficients for each DoF as $A_{ETM} = \frac{d_{ETM}}{\sqrt {d_{ETM}^2 + d_{ITM}^2}}$, and similarly for the ITMs, where the d's come from the table above. However, it occurs to me that maybe this isn't the way to go... I'll mention this later.

## Loop design:

Up until now, at every turn, I had not properly been thinking about how the oplev loop plays into all of this. I went to the foton filters, and grabbed the loop and plant models for the ETMY oplev, and constructed the closed loop gain, 1/1+G, and the modified plant, P/1+G, which is what the ASC loop sees as its plant.

Here, the purple trace explains all of the features I was confused about earlier.

With this in hand, I set up to design a loop to satisfy our motivations.

• Bounce/roll mode notches to avoid exciting them
• 1/f UGF crossing at a few Hz, limited by the gain margin at ~10Hz, which is where the phase will hit 180, due to the notches
• 4th order Elliptic lowpass at 100, to avoid contaminating the longnitudinal signals
• 1/f^2 at low frequencies for DC gain

To do this, I inverted the oplev closed loop plant pole around 4Hz to smooth the whole thing out. Here's a comparison of the measured OLG with what I modelled.

There's a little bit of phase discrepency around 10Hz, but I think it looks about right overall.

## Evaluation:

So, here's the part that counts: How does this actually perform? I took spectra of the QPD error signals, the relevant OpLev signals as out of loop sensors, the PDH error signal and transmitted RIN while single arm locked, with this loop off, and on for all 4 DoFs simultaneously.

Verdict:

• In-loop signals get small, unsurprisingly.
• Cavity signals unchanged.
• ITM oplev signals are unchanged (and not plotted, to not clutter the plots (This isn't surprising since the loops mostly actuate on the ETMs).
• ETM oplev signals get smaller around the 3Hz peak, but are louder in other bands.

This is what makes me think I may need to revisit the actuation matrix. If I did it wrong, I am driving the "invisible" quadrant of the cavity angular DoFs, and this could be what is injecting noise into the oplevs.

## Conclusion:

In the end, I have a better understanding of what is going on, and I don't think we're quite there yet.

Attachment 1: oplevPlant.pdf
Attachment 2: loopDesignComparison.pdf
10921   Tue Jan 20 02:39:49 2015 ericqUpdateASCQPD ASC saga continues.

Although the QPD loops are less than ideal right now, I made changes to the ASC model to trigger the QPD loops on and off politely, depending on TRX and TRY. The settings are exposed on the ASC screen. However, I have not yet exposed the FM triggering that I also set up to make sure the integrator doesn't misbehave if the arm loses lock. We probably don't want to trigger them on at anything lower than arm powers of about 1.0.

I've tested the triggering by randomly turning LSC mode on and off, and making sure that the optics don't recieve much of a kick as the QPD loops engage a few seconds after the LSC boosts do, or when lock is lost. This works as long as there isn't much of a DC offset befire the loops are engaged. (Under 20 counts or so is fine)

As a side note, I was going to use the TRIG_SIG signals sent via the LSC model via SHMEM blocks for the ASC triggering, but oddly, the data streams that made it over were actually the MICH and SRCL TRIG_SIGs, instead of XARM and YARM as labelled. I double checked the simulink diagrams; everything seemed fine to me. In any case, ASS was already recieving TRX and TRY directly via RFM, so I just piped those over to the ASC block. This way is probably better anyways, because it directly references the arm powers, instead of the less obvious LSC triggering matrix.

10997   Tue Feb 10 18:37:17 2015 ericqUpdateASCQPD ASC ready to go

I've remeasured the QPD ASC sensing coefficients, and figured out what I did weird with the actuation coefficients. I've rearranged the controller filters to be able to turn on the boost in a triggered way, and written Up/Down scripts that I've tested numerous times, and Jenne has used as well; they are exposed on the ASC screen.

All four loops (2 arms * pit,yaw), have their gains set for 8Hz UGF, and have 60 degrees of phase margin. The loop shape is the same as the previous ELOG post. Here is the current on/off performance. The PDH signals (not shown, but in attached xml) show no extra noise, and the low frequency RIN goes down a bit, whic is good. The oplevs error signals are a bit noisier, but I suppose that's unavoidable. The Y-arm performs a bit better than the X-arm.

The up/down scripts don't touch the filters' trigger settings at all, just handles switching the input and output and clearing history. FM1 contains the boost which is intended to have a longer trigger delay than the filters themselves.

Attachment 1: Feb10_loops_offOn.png
Attachment 2: Feb10_newLoops_offOn.xml.zip
8381   Mon Apr 1 16:13:50 2013 ChloeUpdate QPD

Because we would like to get started on testing mount vibrations as soon as possible, I've been trying to get one of the other QPDs we found to work with the summing/subtracting circuit on a breadboard. I've been using a power supply that I think Jamie built 15 years ago... which seems to be broken as of today, since I no longer read any signal from it with an oscilloscope.

I tried using a different power supply, but I still can't read any change in signal with the QPD for any of the quadrants when using a laser pointer to shine light on it. I'll be working with Eric on this later this week. In the meantime, I'll try and come up with a shopping list for the nicer QPD circuit that'll be a longer term side project.

8511   Tue Apr 30 12:25:23 2013 ChloeUpdate QPD

Annalisa and I met yesterday and fixed the voltage regulator on the breadboard so the QPD circuit is working. We will meet with Eric on Thursday to determine the course of action with measurements.

15687   Mon Nov 23 23:27:43 2020 KojiSummaryASCQ3000 characterization

Last week and this week I've been working on the characterization of the Q3000 QPDs. The QPDs were named 81, 82, 83, and 94.

• Dark current [OMC LAB ELOG 402]: All the segments looked similar and acceptable except for the seg1 of #82. It has a smaller reverse breakdown voltage (~6V) but even this is an acceptable level.
• Impedance [OMC LAB ELOG 403]: All the segments showed a ~300pF junction capacitance with no reverse bias. This looks quite normal.
• Dark noise [OMC LAB ELOG 404]: All the segments showed ~5pA/rtHz dark noise above 1Hz.

My recommendation is to use #81 and #84 as they have similar dark current characteristics between the segments. But basically, all the QPDs look fine.

The actual junction capacitance and the RF dark noise should be characterized by the actual WFS head circuit.

The QPD packages were labeled and returned to Gautam to be implemented in the WFS heads.

gautam: S/N #84 was installed as the AS WFS QPD. The remaining 3 are stored in the clean cabinet at EX (where the rest of the RF photodiodes are).

Background:
We need MC to be locked soon, so MC suspensions should be damped well(Q~5).

What I did:
1. Set the correct filters and turn all the damping servo on.

2. Kick the optics by adding some offset into the control loop.

3. Measure the Q-value of the ringdown with my eye.

4. If Q-value seems to be around 5, go to step #5. If not, change the filter gain and go to step #2.

5. Done! Do step #1-4 for all MCs.

All parameters I used for the servo are automatically saved here;
/cvs/cds/caltech/burt/autoburt/snapshots/2010/Oct/13/20:07/c1mcs.epics

Result:
Q-values of the damping servo for all MCs are set to around 5.
Attached is the ringdown of MC2 for example.
As you can see, my eye was very rough......

Next work:
- Make a script that does steps #2-5 automatically.
I need pyNDS module installed to get data using Python.
I already wrote the rest of the script.
We'll have Leo help us install pyNDS tomorrow.

Attachment 1: MC2ringdown.png
3303   Tue Jul 27 23:46:45 2010 JenneUpdateSUSQ measurements of 2 TTs

[Koji, Jenne]

We took measurements of the Q of all the modes that we could think of for TT#4, and then repeated several of the same measurements for TT#2.  We noticed that when we took off the backplane and then replaced it on TT#4, the pitch pointing had changed, so we had to repeat the balancing procedure by slightly shifting the position of the wire clamps relative to the mirror holder. No fun. We decided to quit removing the backplanes.

The main conclusion of this evening's measurements of TT#4 is that everything looks very close to the design ideas.  Good work team!

TT#4:

'Free Swinging' values (just for interest)

Vert, no damping:   Q = 31.4

Pitch, no damping (ECD backplane removed): Q = ~700

Yaw, no ECDs: Q = ~900

Pos, no ECDs (no measurement) - we had already put the backplane back on, and didn't want to take it off again.

Damped Values:

Vert, with damping: Q = 14.3

Pitch, with ECDs: overdamped, so Q < 1/2

Yaw, with ECDs: Q = 2.3

Pos, with ECDs: Q = 1.4

Side, with ECDs: Q = 1.9

We also measured the resonant frequency of each of the ECDs for this TT (since we had the backplane removed anyway...)

ECD UL: 10.05Hz

ECD UR: 10.15Hz

ECD LL: 10.21Hz

ECD LR: 10.21Hz

TT#2:

Yaw, with ECDs: Q = 7.0

Pitch, with ECDs: overdamped, so Q < 1/2

Vert: Problematic.  No damping, f = 25.9Hz, Q = 36.  With rubber dampers, f = 20.0Hz, Q = 42.   Yes, you read that right.  The frequency is lower, and the Q is higher *with* the damping.  Perhaps our brains are fried.  Perhaps we've discovered new, inconsistent physics (awfully unlikely....). We'll revisit this again tomorrow to figure out what mistake we're making.

15076   Thu Dec 5 08:44:44 2019 GavinUpdateLoss MeasurementQ Measurements of Test Masses

[Yehonathan, Gavin]

Measuring POX11_Q_MON and injecting a signal into the ITMX_UL_IN port a signal could not be seen on the function generator. After debugging the source of the issue was two fold:

• By using the quadrant drives for coils (UL, UR etc) a signal has to pass through a switch before reaching the driver. To resolve this the signal input was switched to POS_IN (driving the entire coil at once rather than in quadrants) which has no switch to bypass.
• The averaging on the Stanford SR785 was set too low. By increasing the averages from 10 to 25 the signal became more visible.

Unrelated to these issues the signal input was switched to POY11_Q_MON and ITMY_POS_IN as part of the debugging process. The function generator used was switched from the Stanford to the Siglant SDG 1032X.

An unrelated issue but note worthy was the Lenovo 40m laptop used to measure the IFO state (locked or unlocked) ran out of battery in a very short timespan.

To gauge where the resonance of the test masses are FEA model of a simple 40m test mass was computed to give an esitimate at what frequency the eigenmodes exist. For the first two modes the model gave resonances at 20.366 kHz (butterfly mode) and 28.820 kHz (drumhead mode). Then by measuring with an acquisition time of 1 s at they frequencies on the SR785 and injecting broad band white noise with a mean of 0 V and a stdev of 2 V, small peaks were seen above the noise at 20.260 kHz and 28.846 kHz. By then injecting a sine wave at those frequencies with 9 Vpp, the peak became clearly visible above the noise floor.

The last step is to measure the natural decay of these modes when the excitation is turned off. It is difficult to tell currently if these are indeed eigenmodes or just large cavity injections with an associated stabilisation time (what could appear as a ringdown decay). More investigation is required.

Attachment 1: 20191205_132158.jpg
15055   Wed Nov 27 18:51:22 2019 Gavin WallaceUpdateIMCQ Measurement of Test Masses

[Yehonathan, Gavin]

As the resonant modes of the 40m TMs are at high frequencies (starting at 28.8 kHz) we started background checks to understand if we would be able to see resonant frequency excitations in the DCPD output. We used the SR785 in the Q_OUT_DEMODULATOR port of the INPUT_MODE_CLEANER to measure around this frequency. Currently we could not see any natural excitation about the noise floor indicating it may not be possible to see such a small excitation. In any case we are conducting additional measurements in the I_MON port of 1Y2_POY11 to understand if this is a certainty.

15065   Tue Dec 3 14:52:13 2019 ranaUpdateIMCQ Measurement of Test Masses

 Quote: [Yehonathan, Gavin]
1. Lock IMC
2. Lock one of the arms (only) using the IR PDH signal feeding back to an ETM.
3. Excite the ITM using the SR785 near 28.8 kHz
4. Look for the resulting peak using the SR785 spectra of the POX or POY error signal from the demod board
5. Based on the calibrated noise level of the POX/POY, estimate what the SNR will be of the internal mode peak.
15021   Thu Nov 7 17:55:37 2019 shrutiUpdateComputer Scripts / ProgramsPython packages on donatella

Today I realized that pip and other python2,3 packages were installed in the conda base environment, so after running

conda activate

I could run the python-GPIB scripts to interface with the Agilent.

Although, I did have to add a python2 kernel to jupyter/ipython, which I did in a separate conda environment:

conda create -n ipykernel_py2 python=2 ipykernel
source activate ipykernel_py2
python -m ipykernel install --user
 Quote: I've installed pyepics on Donatella running sudo yum install pyepics Pip and ipython did not seem to be installed yet.

1075   Thu Oct 23 18:45:18 2008 AlbertoOmnistructureComputer Scripts / ProgramsPython code for GPIB devices developed for the Absl length experiment
I wrote two Python scripts for my measurement that can be also used/imitated by others: sweepfrequency. py and HP8590.py. The first is is the one that we run by a Python interpreter (just typing "python <name script> <parameters>"from the terminal). It manages the parameters that we have to pass it for the measurement and calls the second one, HP8590.py which actually does most of the job.

Here what it does. It scans the frequency of the Marconi and, for each step, searches the highest peak in the Spectrum Analyzer (which is centered 50 KHz around the frequency of the Marconi). It then associates the amplitude of the peak to the frequency of the Marconi and write the two number in two columns of a file.
The file name, the GPIB-to/LAN interface IP address, the frequency range, the frequency step amplitude and the number of measures we want it to average for each step, are all set by the parameters when we call sweepfrequency.py.
More details are in the help of the function or just looking at the header of the code.

I guess that one can perform other similar measurement just with little changes in the code so I think it could turn out useful to anyone else.
Attachment 1: HP8590.py
# This function provides the measuremeent of the peak amplitude on the spectrum analyzer
# HP8590 analyzer while sweeping the excitation frequency on the function generator.
#
# Alberto Stochino 2008

import re
import sys
import math
from optparse import OptionParser
from socket import *

... 55 more lines ...
Attachment 2: sweepfrequency.py
## sweepfrequency.py [-f filename] [-i ip_address] [-a startFreq] [-z endFreq] [-s stepFreq] [-m numAvg]
#
## This script sweeps the frequency of a Marconi local oscillator, within the range
## delimited by startFreq and endFreq, with a step set by stepFreq. An arbitary
## signal is monitored on a HP8590 spectrum analyzer and the scripts records the
## amplitude of the spectrum at the frequency injected by the Marconi at the moment.

## The GPIB address of the Marconi is assumed to be 17, that of the HP Spectrum Analyzer to be 18

## Alberto Stochino, October 2008

... 51 more lines ...
10209   Wed Jul 16 01:18:02 2014 ranaSummaryLSCPython Wavelet peak finding for dramatic ALS - Red Resonance finding speedup

New script called scripts/ALS/findRedResonance.py finds the IR resonance in less than 20 seconds.

1. Do a ~2 FSR scan of the arm over 10 seconds using the Phase Tracker servo offset ramp. (dt = 10 s)
2. Load the frame data for the TR_OUT and the Phase Tracker phase. (dt = 2 s)
3. Use Python (modern) SciPy to find all peaks with moderate SNR (dt = 3 s)
4. Take the top 3 peaks (all presumably TEM00) and choose the one closest to zero and go there.

The above is the gist of what goes on, but there were several issues to overcome to get the code to run.

1. None of our workstations have a modern enough Python distro to run either the ipython notebooks or the new SciPy with wavelets, so I installed Anaconda Python in the controls home directory.
2. In order to get the peak finder function to work well I gave it a range of peak widths to look for. If we change the speed of the ALS scan by more than 3x, we probably have to change the width array in the function.
3. I've used the find_peaks_cwt function in SciPy. This uses a Ricker ('Mexican Hat') wavelet to find peaks by doing multi-res transforms and looking for ridges in the wavelet space (I think)
4. To make the code run fast, I downsample from 16 kHz to 1 kHz right at the top. Would be better if we had downsampling in v2 of the getData function.

Attachment 1: findRedResonance.pdf
10211   Wed Jul 16 01:35:16 2014 KojiSummaryLSCPython Wavelet peak finding for dramatic ALS - Red Resonance finding speedup

From the last plot:

- Subtracting the offset of 0.0095, the modulation depth were estimated to be 0.20 for 11MHz, 0.25 for 55MHz

- Carrier TEM00 1.0, 1st order 0.01, 2nd order 0.05, 3rd order 0.002, 4th order 0.004

==> mode matching ~93%, dominat higher order is the 2nd order (5%).

Eric: now we have the number for the mode matching. How much did the cavity round-trip loss be using this number?

12937   Mon Apr 10 16:00:26 2017 rebeccaUpdateCamerasPylon installation warning

When trying to install an older version of Pylon packaged for Debian that Joe B. had sent, it gave the warning that the package was of bad quality along with the details below.

Is it safe to ignore the warning? Or should I hold off on the installation?

Use of uninitialized value $ENV{"HOME"} in concatenation (.) or string at /usr/bin/lintian line 108. E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/.IpConfigurator E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/.PylonViewerApp E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/.SpeedOMeter E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtBase.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtBase.so.1 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtBase.so.1.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtBase.so.1.0.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtStyle.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtStyle.so.1 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtStyle.so.1.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtStyle.so.1.0.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtWidgets.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtWidgets.so.1 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtWidgets.so.1.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonQtWidgets.so.1.0.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonViewerSdk.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonViewerSdk.so.1 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonViewerSdk.so.1.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libPylonViewerSdk.so.1.0.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libQtNetwork.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libQtNetwork.so.4 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libQtNetwork.so.4.3 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libQtNetwork.so.4.3.2 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libjpeg.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libjpeg.so.62 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libjpeg.so.62.0.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libtiff.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libtiff.so.3 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/libtiff.so.3.7.3 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/bin/plugins/imageformats/libqtiff.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libXMLLoader_gcc40_v2_1.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxalan-c.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxalan-c.so.110 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxalan-c.so.110.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxalanMsg.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxalanMsg.so.110 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxalanMsg.so.110.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxerces-c.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxerces-c.so.27 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxerces-c.so.27.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxerces-depdom.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxerces-depdom.so.27 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApi/Generic/libxerces-depdom.so.27.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/GenApiPreProcessor E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/libGCBase_gcc40_v2_1.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/libGenApi_gcc40_v2_1.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/libLog_gcc40_v2_1.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/libMathParser_gcc40_v2_1.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/genicam/bin/Linux64_x64/liblog4cpp_gcc40_v2_1.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libgxapi-2.3.3.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libgxapi.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libpylonbase-2.3.3.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libpylonbase.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libpylongigesupp-2.3.3.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libpylongigesupp.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libpylonutility-2.3.3.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libpylonutility.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxalan-c.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxalan-c.so.110 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxalan-c.so.110.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxalanMsg.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxalanMsg.so.110 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxalanMsg.so.110.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxerces-c.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxerces-c.so.27 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxerces-c.so.27.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxerces-depdom.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxerces-depdom.so.27 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/libxerces-depdom.so.27.0 E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/pylon/tl/pyloncamemu-2.3.3.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/pylon/tl/pyloncamemu.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/pylon/tl/pylongige-2.3.3.so E: pylon: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object opt/pylon/lib64/pylon/tl/pylongige.so 12938 Mon Apr 10 18:42:09 2017 johannesUpdateCamerasPylon installation warning It looks like we may not need to use this old Pylon version after all. Gautam and I looked into installing SnapPy with the makefile in scripts/GigE/SnapPy/ that he modified (removed the linkage to paths that don't exist in Pylon 5). Compiling took a while (~10 minutes) but eventually succeeded. The package was installed to /ligo/apps/linux-x86_64/camera/ GV 10pm April 10 2017: We didn't actually try executing an image capture or change some settings using the python utilities, that remains to be done.. 4157 Fri Jan 14 17:13:39 2011 josephbUpdateCamerasPylon driver for Basler Cameras installed on Megatron After getting some help from the Basler technical support, I was directed to the following ftp link: ftp://Pylon4Linux-ro:h50UZgkl@ftp.baslerweb.com I went to the pylon 2.1.0 directory and downloaded the pylon-2.1.0-1748-bininst-64.tar.bz2 file. Inside of this tar file was another one called pylon-bininst-64.tar.bz2 (along with some other sample programs). I ran tar -jxf on pylon-bininst-64.tar.bz2 and placed the results into the /opt/pylon directory. It produced a directory of includes, libraries and binaries there. After playing around with the make files for several sample programs they provided, I finally have been able to compile them. At several places I had to have the make files point to /opt/pylon/lib64 rather than /opt/pylon/lib. I'll be testing the camera with these programs on Monday. I'd also like to see if this particular distribution will work on Centos machines. There's some comments in one of the INSTALL help files suggesting packages needed for an install on Fedora 9, which may mean its possible to get this version working on the Centos machines. 6314 Fri Feb 24 16:10:48 2012 mikeUpdateComputersPyNDS and a Plot Power Spectral Density plot using PyNDS, comparing 5 fast data channels for ETMX. **EDIT** Script here: import nds import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import time daq=nds.daq('fb', 8088) channels=daq.recv_channel_list() e=0 start=int(time.time()-315964819) rqst=['C1:SUS-ETMX_SENSOR_UR','C1:SUS-ETMX_SENSOR_UL','C1:SUS-ETMX_SENSOR_LL','C1:SUS-ETMX_SENSOR_LR','C1:SUS-ETMX_SENSOR_SIDE'] #Requested Channels for c in channels: if c.name in rqst: daq=nds.daq('fb', 8088) data=daq.fetch(start-100, start, c.name) vars()['psddata'+str(e)], vars()['psdfreq'+str(e)]=plt.psd(data[0],NFFT=16384,Fs=c.rate) vars()['label'+str(e)]=c.name e+=1 plt.figure(1) plt.clf() plt.title('PSD Comparison') plt.grid(True, which='majorminor') plt.xlabel(r'Frequency$Hz$') plt.ylabel(r'Decibels$\frac{dB}{Hz}\$')
for x in np.arange(0,e):
plt.loglog(psdfreq0, 10*vars()['psddata'+str(x)], label=vars()['label'+str(x)])
plt.legend()
plt.show()

Attachment 1: PSD_Comparison.png
6316   Fri Feb 24 18:59:04 2012 JenneUpdateComputersPyNDS and a Plot

 Quote: Power Spectral Density plot using PyNDS, comparing 5 fast data channels for ETMX.

Is there any stuff to install, etc?  Y'know, for those of use who don't really know how to use computers and stuff....

6341   Wed Feb 29 17:32:11 2012 MikeUpdateComputersPyNDS and a Plot

Quote:

 Quote: Power Spectral Density plot using PyNDS, comparing 5 fast data channels for ETMX.

Is there any stuff to install, etc?  Y'know, for those of use who don't really know how to use computers and stuff....

No new stuff for these computers.  Everything should be installed already.

4029   Wed Dec 8 17:05:39 2010 josephbUpdateCDSPut in dolphin fiber between c1sus and c1lsc

[josephb,Suresh]

We put in the fiber for use with the Dolphin reflected memory between c1sus and c1lsc (rack 1X4 to rack 1Y3).  I still need to setup the dolphin hub in the 1X4 rack, but once that is done, we should be able to test the dolphin memory tomorrow.

5858   Wed Nov 9 21:32:38 2011 MirkoUpdateAdaptive FilteringPut accelerometers 4-6 on top of MC2 tank

Put the accelerometers on top of MC2. Orientated as the arms,GUR1 and STS1:

Should be fixed a bit more rigidly.

Looking into the signals at a quiet time:

Hmm. Either the acc. are mislabeled or there is really bad x-y coupling. The connectors in the back of the acc. power supply / amplifier box are in ascending order.

Attachment 3: Coherence_quiet_time.fig
4138   Tue Jan 11 18:41:43 2011 JenneUpdateIOOPut MC PZT offset onto MC board, instead of on awkward cart

[Larisa and Jenne]

We wanted to get rid of the awkward cart that was sitting behind the 1Y1 rack.  This cart was supplying a +5V offset to the PZT driver, so that we could use the MC length signal to feedback to lock the laser to the MC cavity.  Instead, we put the offset on the last op amp before the servo out on the Mc Servo Board.  Because we wanted +5V, but the board only had +5, +15, -15V as options, and we needed -5 to add just before the op amp (U40 in the schematic), because the op amp is using regular negative feedback, we made a little voltage divider between -15V and GND, to give ourselves -5V.  We used the back side of the voltage test points (where you can check to make sure that you're actually getting DC voltage on the board), and used a 511Ohm and 1.02kOhm resistor as a voltage divider.

Then we put a 3.32kOhm resistor in ~"parallel" to R124, which is the usual resistor just before the negative input of the op amp.  Our -5V goes to our new resistor, and should, at the output, give us a +5V offset.

Sadly, when we measure the actual output we get, it's only +2.3V.  Sadface.

We went ahead and plugged the servo out into the PZT driver anyway, since we had previously seen that the fluctuation when the mode cleaner is locked was much less than a volt, so we won't run into any problems with the PZT driver running into the lower limit (it only goes 0-10V).

Suresh has discovered that the op amp that we're looking at, U40 on the schematic, is an AD829, which has an input impedance of a measely 13kOhm.  So maybe the 3.32kOhm resistors that we are using (because that's what had already been there) are too large.  Perhaps tomorrow I'll switch all 3 resistors (R119, R124, and our new one) to something more like 1kOhm.  But right now, the MC is locked, and I'm super hungry, and it's time for some arm locking action.

I've attached the schematic.  The stuff that we fitzed with was all on page 8.

Attachment 1: D040180-B.pdf
4140   Wed Jan 12 01:38:52 2011 KojiUpdateIOOPut MC PZT offset onto MC board, instead of on awkward cart

I can not think of any reason that the input impedance of 13kOhm between the pos/neg inputs produces such a big change at the output. In any case, the differential voltage between the pos/neg inputs produces a big output. But the output was just 2V or so. This means that the neg input was actually about zero volt. This ensures the principle of the summing amplifier of this kind.

Because the input impedance of the summing node (the additional resister you put at the negative input) is not infinity, the voltage divider is not perfect and shows 10% reduction of the voltge (i.e. the output will have +4.5V offset instead of +5V). But still it is not enough to explain such a small output like 2.3V.

What I can think of is that the earlier stages somehow have the offset for some reason. Anyway, it is difficult to guess the true reason unless all of the nodes around the last stage are checked with the multimeters.

At least, we can remove the voltage divider and instead put a 10k between -15V and the neg input in order to impose +5V offset at the output. This costs 1.5mA instead of 10mA.

4147   Wed Jan 12 22:39:16 2011 SureshUpdateIOOPut MC PZT offset onto MC board, instead of on awkward cart

Quote:

I can not think of any reason that the input impedance of 13kOhm between the pos/neg inputs produces such a big change at the output. In any case, the differential voltage between the pos/neg inputs produces a big output. But the output was just 2V or so. This means that the neg input was actually about zero volt. This ensures the principle of the summing amplifier of this kind.

Because the input impedance of the summing node (the additional resister you put at the negative input) is not infinity, the voltage divider is not perfect and shows 10% reduction of the voltge (i.e. the output will have +4.5V offset instead of +5V). But still it is not enough to explain such a small output like 2.3V.

What I can think of is that the earlier stages somehow have the offset for some reason. Anyway, it is difficult to guess the true reason unless all of the nodes around the last stage are checked with the multimeters.

At least, we can remove the voltage divider and instead put a 10k between -15V and the neg input in order to impose +5V offset at the output. This costs 1.5mA instead of 10mA.

[Koji, Suresh]

We looked at the board and found that the resistor R119 (the feed back) is 1.65k instead of the 3.32k that was needed for unity gain.  The gain has been intentionally reduced to 0.5 so that output range would be close to the 0-10V that is required at the input range of the PZT driver which follows.   A note to this effect is already present in the D040180-B, page 8.

The voltage divider with 1k and 0.5k provides 4.5V (ref Koji's note above) this provides 2.25V at the output due to the gain of 0.5.  To get to the original goal of introducing a 5V offset on the output, we introduced the modification shown in the  'D040180-B with 5V offset.pdf' uploaded below.  Please check page 8, the changes are marked in red.  We checked to make sure that the output is 5V when the input is disconnected.

The PCB pics at the end are also attached.  The 4.99k resistor is glued onto the PCB with epoxy and placed as close to the opamp possible.

Attachment 1: P1120508.JPG
Attachment 2: P1120509.JPG
9440   Wed Dec 4 15:43:13 2013 JenneSummaryLSCPut LSC DAQ channels back

Last week, Koji cleaned up the LSC model to make it much more readable, while he was working on piping the ALS signals to the LSC model.  However, somehow the DAQ Channels block got deleted before the model was committed to the svn.  Since there were 2 months between svn checkins for c1lsc.mdl, it's possible that someone had the model open just to look at, and the block got deleted, and that's the version that Koji started with.

Anyhow, thankfully we have the svn, so Koji and I found that the DAQ Channels block was (as expected) in the previously checked-in version of the LSC model.  I put a copy of the old model onto my desktop, opened it up, copied the DAQ Channels block, and then pasted it into the new cleaned-up version of the model.  (Jamie - is there a way to conveniently download a previous version through the web interface?)

I have checked it in, compiled and restarted the lsc model.  The _DQ channels are back now.

12337   Tue Jul 26 14:24:38 2016 KojiSummaryVACPurge compressed air system at LHO

I've visited the purge clean air system at LHO Yarm mid-station with John Worden.

The system is described C981637. There is a schematic in C981637-06-V (Vol.6).pdf although the schematic has some differences (or uncorrected mistakes).

This system is intended to provide positive pressure when a soft cover is attached to a chamber door. When the door is open, the purging does not help to keep the chamber clean because the flow is too slow. This protection has to be done with overhead HEPA filters (22x5000cfm). It may be possible that this purge air helps the tube not to allow dusts to come in. But before using this, the chambers and the tubes have to be cleaned, according to John.

- Here at the site, the purge air system is started up a day before the vent. This system is used for the vent air, the purge air, and turbo foreline filling.

- Air intake (attachment 1): At the site, the air is intaken from the VEA. We want to incorporate somewhat clean air instead of dirty, dusty, outside air.

- Initial filter (attachment 2): a high volume filter before the compressors.

- The compressors (attachment 3, 4) are 5x 6 horse power air compressor each goes up to 160 psi. They are turned on and off depending on the demand of the air. Which is turned on is revolved by the controller to equalize the compressor usage hours.

- The compressed air goes through the air cooler (heat exchanger) to remove the heat by the compressor work.

- This air goes through prefilters and accumulated in the air receiver (100psi) (attachment 5). This receiver tank has an automated vent valve for periodical water drainage at the bottom.

- The accumulated air is discharged to twin drier towers (attachment 6, blue). The tower is operated by the controller (attachment 7) alternately with a period of 4min (or 10min by setting). When one of the towers is working, a humid air comes from the bottom and the dry air is discharged from the top. A part of the dry air goes into the other tower from the top to the bottom and dries the tower. There is a vent at the bottom to discharge water periodically.

- The dried air goes through 4 types of filters. After the last filter, all of the plumbing should be made of stainless steel to keep cleanliness.

- The air goes to the pressure reducing regulator (attachment 8, gray). The final flow speed at the chamber side is 50cfm max, according to John.

- The lower pressure air goes through the final filter (attachment 8, blue). As the pressure is low, this filter is big in order to keep the volume of the air flow.

- The purge air is supplied to the chamber side with KF50 (attachment 9). There is a vent valve (attachment 10) for safety and also to run a dry air for at least a day before the use to clean up the supply line. The purge line is disconnected when no in use.

- The entire system (attachment 11) and size comparison (attachment 12).

Attachment 1: air_intake.jpg
Attachment 2: initial_filter.jpg
Attachment 3: compressors1.jpg
Attachment 4: compressors2.jpg
Attachment 6: drier.jpg
Attachment 7: drier_controller2.jpg
Attachment 8: pressure_regulator_and_last_filter.jpg
Attachment 9: chamber_side_supply.jpg
Attachment 10: vent_valve_for_line_cleaning.jpg
Attachment 11: the_whole_system.jpg
Attachment 12: size_comparison.jpg
12338   Tue Jul 26 16:01:32 2016 SteveSummaryVACPurge compressed air system

Thanks for checking this out Koji

The builder in 1996 was Process System International, Inc ( Westborough, MA ) It does not exist any longer or I just could not find them. Flow diagramm at Atm1

Should I be keep looking for a company who could quote us for building a similar smaller unit with 10 - 15 cfm flowrate?

Note: my intension with the two mobile-overhead HEPA filter was the same as John Worden's " clean air overpressured tent " at chamber entrance.

Atm2, Our unit has 650 cfm, velocity 90 fpm at resistance 0.5"    It may be enough to give a little overpressure if we seal it well to the chamber

We use to use them to minimize dirt getting inside the chanbers.

Attachment 1: cleanAirSupl.pdf
Attachment 2: mobileHEPA.jpg
12339   Tue Jul 26 17:41:59 2016 KojiSummaryVACPurge compressed air system

We have no number for the CFM without calculation. We can't assume a random number like 10-15

15393   Thu Jun 11 17:35:34 2020 gautamUpdateVACPumpspool UPS needs battery replacement

Summary:

The pumpspool UPS has its "Replace Battery" indicator light on. Might be a good chance to change the UPS, but at the very least, we should put in fresh batteries (last replacement was in Aug 2017).

I'll say this again - the pumpspool area is noisier than I remember it being, I think one / both of the roughing pumps backing TP2 / TP3 need tip-seal replacements.

BTW, EX is 5C hotter than EY, by virtue of the tarnac outside? In fact, judging by Steve's thermometers, EX reports a 12C swing in 24 hours between 30 C and 18 C (so almost no temperature control) while EY reports a 5C swing between 20 and 25 C. This is borne out by the ETM Oplev data I think...

15394   Fri Jun 12 01:23:32 2020 KojiUpdateVACPumpspool UPS needs battery replacement

1. I agree that it's likely that it was the temp signal glitch.
Recom #2: I approve to reopen the valves to pump down the main volume. As long as there is no frequent glitch, we can just bring the vacuum back to normal with the current software setup.

2. Recom #1 is also reasonable. You can use simple logic like if we register 10 consecutive samples that exceed the threshold, we can activate the interlock. I feel we should still keep the temp interlock. Switching between pumping mode and the normal operation may cause unexpected omission of the interlocks when it is necessary.

3. We should purchase the UPS battery / replacement rotary TIP seal. Once they are in hand, we can stop the vacuum and execute the replacement. Can one person (who?) accomplish everything with some remote help?

4. The lab temp: you mean, 12degC swing with the AC on!?

15396   Fri Jun 12 17:32:40 2020 KojiUpdateVACPumpspool UPS needs battery replacement

Jon and Koji remotely supported Jordan's resetting the TP2 controller.

Here is the instruction by Jon
From the operator's console in front of the vac rack:
1. Open a terminal window (click the LXTerminal icon on the desktop)
2. Type "control" + enter to open the vac controls screen
3. Toggle all the open valves closed (edit by KA: and manually close RV2 by rotating the gate valve handle )
4. Turn OFF TP2 by clicking the "Off' button. Make sure the status changes and the rotation speed falls to zero (you'll also hear the pump spinning down)
5. The other pumps (TP1, TP3) can be left running
6. Once TP2 has stopped spinning, go to the back of the rack and locate the ethernet cable running from the back of the TP2 controller to the IOLAN server (near the top of the rack). Disconnect and reconnect the cable at each end, verifying it is firmly locked in place.
7. From the front of the rack, power down the TP2 controller (I don't quite remember for the Agilent, but you might have to move the slider on the front from "Remote" to "Local" first)
8. Wait about 30 seconds, then power it back on. If you had to move the slider to shut it down, revert it back to the "Remote" position.
9. Go back to the controls screen on the console. If the pump came back up and is communicating serially again, its status will say something other than "NO COMM"
10. Turn TP2 back on. Verify that it spins up to its nominal speed (66 kRPM)
11. At this point you can reopen any valves you initially closed (any that were already closed before, leave closed)

TP2 was stopped and at this moment the glitches were gone. Jordan powercycled the TP2 controller and we brought up the TP2 back at the full speed.
However, the glitches came back as before. Obviously we can't go on from here, and we've decided to stop the recovery process here today.

- We left TP1/2/3 running while the valves including RV2 were closed.

- When Jordan is back in the lab next week, we'll try to use TP3 as the backing of TP1 so that we can resume the main volume pumping.

- Currently, TP3 does not have interlocking and that is a risk. Jon is going to implement it.

- Meanwhile, we will try to replace the controller of TP2. We are supposed to have this in the lab. Ask Chub about the location.

- Once we confirm the stability of the diagnostic signals for TP2, we will come back to the nominal pumping scheme.

Attachment 1: Screen_Shot_2020-06-12_at_17.22.23.png
15397   Fri Jun 12 19:02:52 2020 gautamUpdateVACPumpspool UPS needs battery replacement

I still don't understand why restoring the vacuum is contingent on this functionality working. All the TPs have their own internal logic to shutdown the pump if some damage threshold is exceeded. Plus, we have the pressure-sensor based interlocks to protect the main volume as well as pumps. While the extra redundancy from the readbacks from the controller is useful, clearly it isn't the first line of defense?

The main volume pressure is currently ~10mTorr. If we pump down before this reaches 500mTorr, the procedure is pretty straightforward. Otherwise, we have to do the dance with the manual throttling valve (judging by current rate of increase, unlikely to exceed this over the weekend, but I lose IFO time).

Obviously I don't want to rush this and have some permanent damage, so I'll stay out of this unless otherwise instructed.

15398   Fri Jun 12 19:23:56 2020 KojiUpdateVACPumpspool UPS needs battery replacement

The vacuum safety policy and design are not clear to me, and I don't know what the first and second defense is. Since we had limited time and bandwidth during the remotely-supported recovery work today, we wanted to work step by step.

The pressure rising rate is 20mtorr/day, and turning on TP3 early next week will resume the main-volume pumping without too much hustle. If you need the IFO time now, contact with Jon and use backing with TP3.

15399   Fri Jun 12 19:33:31 2020 gautamUpdateVACPumpspool UPS needs battery replacement

Didn't mean to sound whiny. I will wait until the vacuum team tells me it is okay.

 Quote: The vacuum safety policy and design are not clear to me, and I don't know what the first and second defense is. Since we had limited time and bandwidth during the remotely-supported recovery work today, we wanted to work step by step. The pressure rising rate is 20mtorr/day, and turning on TP3 early next week will resume the main-volume pumping without too much hustle. If you need the IFO time now, contact with Jon and use backing with TP3.
14406   Fri Jan 18 17:44:14 2019 gautamUpdateVACPumping on RGA volume

Steve came by the lab today, and looked at the status of the upgraded vacuum system. He recommended pumping on the RGA volume, since it has not been pumped on for ~3 months on account of the vacuum upgrade. The procedure (so we may script this operation in the future) was:

1. Start with the pumpspool completely isolated from the main IFO volume.
2. Open V5, pump down the section between V5 and VM3. Keep an eye on PTP3.
3. Open VM3, keep an eye on P4. It was reporting ~10 mtorr, went to "LO".
4. Close VM3 and V5, transition pumping of the RGA volume to TP1 which is backed by TP2 (we had to open V4 as all valves were closed due to an N2 pressure drop event).
5. Open VM2.
6. Watch CC4.

CC4 pressure has been steadily falling. Steve recommends leaving things in this state over the weekend. He recommends also turning the RGA unit on so that the temperature rises and there is a bakeout of the RGA. The temperature may be read off manually using a probe attached to it.

Attachment 1: CC4.png
16490   Mon Dec 6 14:26:52 2021 KojiUpdateVACPumping down the RGA section

Jordan reported that the RGA section needs to be pumped down to allow the analyzer to run at sufficiently low pressure (P<1e-4 torr).
The RGA section was pumped down with the TP2/TP3. The procedure is as listed below.
If the pressure go up to P>1e-4 torr, we need to keep the pump running until the scan is ready.

----
### Monitor / Control screen setup ###
1. On c1vac: cd /cvs/cds/caltech/target/c1vac/medm
3. RGA section (P4) 3.6e-1 torr / P3/P2 still atm.

### TP2/TP3 backing ###
5. Turn on AUX RP with the circuit breaker hanging on the AC.
6. Open manual valve for TP2/3/ backing / PTP2/3 ~ 8torr

### TP2/TP3 starting ###
7. Turned on TP2/TP3 with the Standby OFF

### Pump down the pump spool ###
8. Connect manual RP line (Quick Connect)
9. Turned on RP1/RP3 -> quickly reached 0.4 torr
10. Open V6 for pump spool pumping -> Immediately go down to sufficiently low pressure for TP2/TP3.
(10.5 I had to close V6 at this point)
11. Open V5 to start pumping pump spool with TP3 (TP2 still stand by) -> P3 immediately goes down below 1e-4 torr. This automatically closed V6 because of the low pressure of P3 (interlocking)

### Pump down the RGA section ###
12. Open VM3 to pump down RGA section -> P4 goes down to <1e-4 torr
13. P2 is still 2e-3. So decided to open V4 to use TP2 (now it's ready) too. -> Saturated at 1.7e-3

### Shutting down ###
14. Close VM3
15. Close V4/V5 to isolate TP2/TP3
16. Stop TP2/TP3 -> Slowing down
17. Stop RP1/RP3
18. Close the manual valves for TP2/3/ backing
19. Stop AUX RP with the circuit breaker hanging on the AC.

16493   Tue Dec 7 13:12:50 2021 KojiUpdateVACPumping down the RGA section

So that Jordan can run the RGA scan this afternoon, I ran TP3 and started pumping down the RGA section.

Procedure:
- Same 1~4
- Same 5
- 6 Opened only the backing path for TP3
- 7 Turned on TP3 only

- TP3 reached the nominal full speed @75kRPM

- 11 Opened V5 to pump the pump spool -> Immediately reached P3<1e-4
- 12 Opened VM3 to pump the RGA section -> Immediately reached P4<1e-4

The pumps are kept running. I'll come back later to shut down the pumps.
=> Jordan wants to heat the filament (?) and to run the scan tomorrow.
So we decided to keep TP3 running overnight. I switched TP3 to the stand-by mode (= lower rotation speed @50kRPM)

16494   Wed Dec 8 10:14:43 2021 JordanUpdateVACPumping down the RGA section

After an overnight pumpdown/RGA warm up, I took a 100 amu scan of the RGA volume and subsequent pumping line. Attached is a screenshot along with the .txt file. Given the high argon peak (40) and the N2/O2 ratio, it looks like there is a decent sized air leak somehwere in the volume.

Are we interested in the hydrocarbon leak rates of this volume? That will require another scan with one of the calibrated leaks opened.

Edit: Added a Torr v AMU plot to see the partial pressures

 Quote: So that Jordan can run the RGA scan this afternoon, I ran TP3 and started pumping down the RGA section. Procedure: - Same 1~4 - Same 5 - 6 Opened only the backing path for TP3 - 7 Turned on TP3 only - TP3 reached the nominal full speed @75kRPM - 11 Opened V5 to pump the pump spool -> Immediately reached P3<1e-4 - 12 Opened VM3 to pump the RGA section -> Immediately reached P4<1e-4 The pumps are kept running. I'll come back later to shut down the pumps. => Jordan wants to heat the filament (?) and to run the scan tomorrow. So we decided to keep TP3 running overnight. I switched TP3 to the stand-by mode (= lower rotation speed @50kRPM)

Attachment 1: 40m_RGAVolume_12_8_21.PNG
Attachment 2: 40m_RGAVolume_Torr_12_8_21.PNG
16501   Fri Dec 10 19:22:01 2021 KojiUpdateVACPumping down the RGA section

The scan result was ~x10 higher than the previously reported scan on 2020/9/15 (https://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8081/40m/15570), which was sort of high from the reference taken on 2018/7/18.

This just could mean that the vacuum level at the RGA was x10 high.
We'll just go ahead with the vacuum repair and come back to the RGA once we return to "vacuum normal".

Meanwhile, I asked Jordan to turn off the RGA to make it cool down. I shut off RGA section and turned TP2 off.

64   Mon Nov 5 22:24:38 2007 Andrey, SteveOmnistructureVACPumping down goes smoothly

We (Steve and Andrey) started pumping down at 3.25PM today. At 9 PM we turned off the rotary pump, and turned on turbomolecular pumps.

By 10.10PM we reached the pressure 1 milliTorr, and the current status is "Vacuum Normal". We leave the turbopumps on for the night, and as it is pretty late for Steve, we are going home.

P.S. Steve was very displeased with the standard selection of "Type" of messages, he would like to extend that list.
14634   Thu May 23 15:30:56 2019 gautamUpdateVACPumpdown underway - so far so good!

[chub, koji, gautam]

1. We executed the pre-pumpdown tasks per the checklist - heavy doors were on by ~1030am.
2. We were thwarted by the display of c1vac becoming unresponsive - the mouse cursor moves, but we could not interact with any screens. Connecting to c1vac by ssh with the -X option, we could interact with everything. Using top, we saw that the load average was reporting ~8 - this is pretty high! The most demanding processes were the modbus IOC and some python processes, presumably connected with the interlocks. We tried stopping the interlock systemctl process, kill -9ing the heavy processes, but to no avail. Next, we tried killing the X display proces, but this also did not fix the problem. Finally, we did a soft reboot of c1vac - the machine came back up, but still no interactivity. So we moved asia, the EY laptop, to the vacuum station for this pumpdown. We will fix the situation once the vacuum is in the nominal state.
3. The actual pumpdown commenced by first evacuating the EY and IY annular volumes with the roughing pump. There is an interlock condition that prevents V6 from being opened if the PRP gauge reports < 0.25 torr (this is to protect against oil backstreaming from the roughing pumps I believe). To get around this, we gave the roughing pumps some work by exposing the annular line to the atmospheric pressure of the EY and IY annuli. In a few minutes, both of these reported < 1 torr.
4. Main volume pumping started around noon - we have been going down in pressure steadily at ~3 torr/min (Koji has a nice python utility made that calculates the rate from the pressure channel).
5. At the time of writing, after ~3.5 hrs of pumping, we are at 25 torr. I will keep going till ~1 torr, and then valve off the main volume until tomorrow, when Chub and I will work on getting the turbo pumps exposed to the main volume. Pausing at 355pm while I go for the colloquium. Resumed later in the evening, stopping for today at 500 mtorr.
6. In preparation for the increased load on TP2 and TP3, I spun them up to the "high RPM mode" from their nominal "Standby mode".

Close up photos of the EY and IY chambers may be found here.

Update on the display manager of c1vac: I was able to get it working again by running sudo systemctl restart display-manager. Now I can interact with the MEDM screens on c1vac. It is a bit annoying that this machine doesn't have the users directory so I don't have access to the many convenient StripTool templates though - maybe I'll make local copies tomorrow for the pumpdown.

Attachment 1: pumpdownPres.png
14370   Wed Dec 19 21:14:50 2018 gautamUpdateVACPumpdown tomorrow

### I just spoke to Jon who asked me to make this elog - we will be ready to test one or more parts of the pumpdown procedure tomorrow (12/20), so we should proceed as planned to put the heavy doors back on EY and OMC chambers at 9am tomorrow morning. Jon will circulate a more detailed procedure about the pumpdown steps later today evening.

14372   Thu Dec 20 08:38:27 2018 JonUpdateVACPumpdown tomorrow

Linked is the pumpdown procedure, contained in the old 40m documentation. The relevant procedure is "All Off --> Vacuum Normal" on page 11.

Quote:

### I just spoke to Jon who asked me to make this elog - we will be ready to test one or more parts of the pumpdown procedure tomorrow (12/20), so we should proceed as planned to put the heavy doors back on EY and OMC chambers at 9am tomorrow morning. Jon will circulate a more detailed procedure about the pumpdown steps later today evening.

14369   Wed Dec 19 19:51:19 2018 gautamUpdateGeneralPumpdown prep

[Koji, gautam]

Summary:

We are ready to put the heavy doors back on the chambers and do some test pumpdowns tomorrow morning if Jon gives us the go-ahead. Also, Koji made the OMC resonate some of the AUX beam light we send into it

Details:

1. EY work:
• IMC was locked, and we attempted to locate the beam with an IR card inside the chamber.
• Koji found that the beam was too high, we were over-shooting the entire black-glass baffle on the EY table.
• So I moved the TTs to try and center the beam through the aperture of aforementioned baffle.
• Once this was done, we found that the beam was misaligned in yaw by ~1-inch in transmission on the EY optics table (there was an iris in place marking the cavity transmission axis). This explains why I couldn't find any TRY flashes while moving the TTs around.
• We hypothesize that without the 2 degree ETM wedge in place, there isn't a compatible axis for the ITM transmission to also make it through the EY baffle and transmission iris. Over ~1m, the 2 degree wedge makes roughly 1.4 inch translation in yaw, so this seems to be a plausible hypothesis.
• The ETMY suspension was moved from the mini-cleanroom setup back into the EY vacuum chamber. Two clamps (finger tightened only) hold it in place on the NE edge of the optical table. We decided that this is a better resting palce for the cage over the holidays than an in-air cleanroom.
2. OMC chamber work:
• While we were in clean garb, we decided to also investigate the OMC situation a bit.
• It quickly became apparent that it was hopeless for me to work in chamber in the tightly confined IOO chamber. So Koji went in to have a look.
• Koji will post the detailed alignment procedure - but after some alignment of the AUX laser input beam axis using in air steering mirrors and Koji's expert tweaking of the pointing into the OMC, we observed some resonances of the OMC.
• Attachment #1 shows the full-range triangle ramp applied to the OMC length PZT (top row) and the OMC REFL signal (bottom row), measured using a PDA520 (chosen for its large active area) connected to a scope (AC-coupled, 1Mohm impedance, averaged to make the dips more prominent).
• The OMC transmission was also (barely) visible on an IR card.
• So the OMC length PZT seems capable of sweeping the length of the cavity. Based on the size of the dips we saw, the MM into the cavity is sub 1-percent.
• The transmission PDs didn't output any measurable signal - but I'm not sure that the satellite box / readout electronics have been carefully characterized on the electroncis bench, so that will have to be done first.
• We replaced the copper cover of the OMC (finger tightened for now) in case we do any test pumpdowns tomorrow. HV supply has been turned off, and the AUX laser has been reverted to standby mode.
Attachment 1: OMCscan.pdf
14631   Wed May 22 22:50:13 2019 gautamUpdateVACPumpdown prep

I did the following:

1. Checked the ETMY OSEM sensing matrix and OSEM actuation matrix - more on this later, but everything seems much more reasonable than it was prior to this vent.
2. Checked that the IMC could be locked with the low-power beam
3. Aligned the Y-arm cavity using the green beam. Then tweaked the TT1/TT2 alignment until I saw IR flashes in TRY.
4. Repeated #2 for the X arm, using the BS to control the beam pointing.
5. Confirmed that the AS beam makes it out of the vacuum. It is only ~30uW in a large (~1cm dia) beam, so not the clearest spot on an IR card, but looks pretty clean, no evidence of clipping. I removed an ND filter on the AS port camera in order to better see the beam on the CRT monitor, this should be re-installed prior to ramping the input power to the IMC again.
6. With the PRM aligned, I confirmed that I could see resonant flashes in the POP QPD.
7. With the SRM aligned, I confirmed that I could see SRC cavity flashes on the AS camera.

I think this completes the pre-pumpdown alignment checks we usually do. The detailed plan for tomorrow is here: please have a look and lmk if I missed something.

ELOG V3.1.3-