ID |
Date |
Author |
Type |
Category |
Subject |
8938
|
Tue Jul 30 13:41:35 2013 |
Koji | Update | General | ITMX oplev |
I wonder what optics is causing the halo on the oplev beam.
It this comes from any uncoated lens (or similar) it should be identified. |
8939
|
Tue Jul 30 15:38:24 2013 |
manasa | Update | General | ITMX oplev |
Quote: |
I wonder what optics is causing the halo on the oplev beam.
It this comes from any uncoated lens (or similar) it should be identified.
|
We identified this to be coming from the uncoated concave lens that we have right after the He-Ne laser which should also be replaced in addition to the other problems with the oplev. |
5395
|
Tue Sep 13 16:57:44 2011 |
steve | Update | LSC | ITMX oplev ** |
Quote: |
I lined up the Y Arm for locking and then centered the oplevs for ETMY and ITMY.
* The ITMY OL has still got the old style laser. Steve, pleaes swap this one for a HeNe. Also the optical layout seems strange: there are two copies of the laser beam going into the chamber (??). Also, the QPD transimpedance needs to be increase by a factor of ~10. We're only getting ~500 counts per quadrant. Its worth it for someone to re-examine the whole ITMY OL beam layout.
* The ETMY OL beam was coming out but clipping on the mount for the ETMY OL HeNe. This indicates a failure on our part to do the ETMY closeout alignment properly. In fact, I get the feeling from looking around that we overlooked aligning the OL and IPPOS/ANG beams this time. If we're unlucky this could cause us to vent again. I undid part of the laser mount and changed the height on the receiving mirror to get the beam back onto the QPD.
I noticed that there is significant green light now getting into some of the IR PDs; beacuse of this there are weird offsets in the TRY QPD and perhaps elsewhere. We had better purchase some filters to tape over the front of the sensitive IR sensors to prevent the couplling from the green laser.
* There is a beam on IPPOS, but its too big for the detector (this has always been the case). We need to put a 2" lens with a weak focusing power on this path so as to halve the beam size on the detector. Right now its clipping and misleading. There is also a 0.9V offset on the SUM signal. I'm not sure if this readout is working at all.
* I couldn't find any beam on IPANG at all. Not sure what's changed since Kiwamu saw it.
|
Old Coherent diode laser was replaced by Uniphase HE/NE 1125P at ITMX.
Newport 10B20NC.1 broadband beam sampler set up as beamspitter to dump 90% of the light into beam trap. Beam in to test mass 0.7 mW , returning to qpd 0.07 mW = ~ 3,700 counts
f 1.5 m lens placed into ingoing beam path to reduce the spot size on the qpd. ITMY oplev will be done in this manner tomorrow.
* IP-ANG is lost with the Piezo Jena PS
* IP-POS cable have to be found at the LSC rack
|
5749
|
Fri Oct 28 01:13:17 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | SUS | ITMX oplev : iris fully opened |
I found that the sum of the ITMX oplev signals had gone down to zero yesterday.
I checked the ITMX table and found two iris on the He-Ne laser path were blocking the beam on their apertures.
I guess this is because we were working around there for installation of POP/POX and may have touched some of the oplev optics.
Then I fully opened the apertures of those two iris and the sum went back to nominal of 600 counts. |
4032
|
Thu Dec 9 00:34:53 2010 |
Osamu | Update | SUS | ITMX oplev Pitch OLTF |
We measured Open loop TF for oplev pitch on ITMX.


All feed back filter of oplev was on as same as before. Original notch filters which notches above 10Hz resonance should be modified with some measurements of present resonant frequency. Up to 10Hz, a simple f^2 filter is used, so the notch should not affect this measurement.
Measured upper UGF is about 2Hz with gain slider 1, and lower UGF is 1.3Hz. Phase margin is 40 degree, so it is not a good idea to increase the gain drastically.
I have measured the coherence also but I could not find a way to put it on this picture. Anyway coherence below 0.6Hz was not so good like ~0.95. This can be improved if larger excitation is used next time.
During this measurement around 0.2-0.3Hz, small earthquake happened but seemed OK for the control.
We will measure the other TF, yaw, ETMX or somthing, maybe tomorrow, due to free swinging ITMX and ETMX tonight.
|
1595
|
Sun May 17 21:45:40 2009 |
rob | Update | ASC | ITMX oplev centered |
|
5655
|
Wed Oct 12 08:43:30 2011 |
steve | Update | SUS | ITMX oplev improved a bit |
Atm2 is before optical path adjustment. The idea was to remove possible clipping in vacuum.
Coherense significantly reduced below 4 Hz
Today I will replace the He/Ne laser 1125P with 1103P
|
Attachment 1: ITMXoplev.png
|
|
Attachment 2: ITMXoplevservo_ON.png
|
|
17568
|
Wed Apr 26 18:41:56 2023 |
Paco | Update | OPLEV Tables | ITMX oplev laser died |
[Paco, Koji, Mayank]
We replaced ITMX Oplev HeNe laser after last one died.
- We noticed the ITMX HeNe laser died, so we couldn't have Oplev control. With Koji's help, we located a laser tube which had no labels and a sticker up front so we assumed this is new. We removed the faulty tube from the ITMX table and tested it using the display control unit (labeled 1). The laser head was 1103, and weirdly it turned on. We also located some control units in the Oplev cabinet which had been labeled "working with Display" from 2022.
- After testing a few combinations we realized CARE NEEDS TO BE TAKEN TO NOTICE THE INTERLOCK SWITCH BEFORE TESTING ANY PAIR> it turned out our old controller was ok, but the interlock switch had fallen. We also noted the two spare units labeled "working with Display" were indeed operating correctly they just needed their interlock switches. Surprisingly the "new" laser head we planned to use as a spare is DEAD.
- After assuming the old head was working and its controller just needed the interlock, we reinstalled it on the table. Unfortunately, after realigning the OPLEV beam we saw the SUM drop from 1500 counts (usually 15000) to 0. So the laser head was indeed faulty! + WE HAVE NO MORE 1103 SPARE HEADS!
- We couldn't find another 1103 spare head, so we opted for the 1125 along with its corresponding controller. This worked fine, except the unit is thicker and the whole beam path changed by ~ 1 cm in height. Mayank and I restored the alignment and centered the ITMX oplev. A photo of the changes made to reach the final setup are in Attachments #1-2. Most notably we had to lower the big pedestals where the HeNe laser head is resting to accommodate this height difference.
- Finally the laser beam diameter is different, so we removed the "collimating" lens immediately after the HeNe head. This had the effect of restoring the beam path, but we placed a shorter focal length lens between the last steering mirror and the QPD> this means the previous ITMX oplev calibration is now bogus.
|
Attachment 1: PXL_20230427_004834747.jpg
|
|
Attachment 2: PXL_20230427_013642978.jpg
|
|
12125
|
Mon May 23 10:55:49 2016 |
steve | Summary | SUS | ITMX oplev laser replaced |
May 23, 2016 ITMX dead He/Ne laser sn P845648 replaced after 1062 days [2.9 yrs] by 1103P, sn P859884, with output 2.6 mW, nicely round beam quality at 15 meters.
Power just before viewport 1 mW, returning light on qpd 154 microW = 7,500 counts
|
Attachment 1: ITMXoplev.png
|
|
5437
|
Fri Sep 16 17:09:07 2011 |
Paul | Update | SUS | ITMX oplev plan |
I just drew a basic picture of how the ITMX oplev path could be reworked to minimise the number of optics in the path. Only possible problem with this might be the turning mirror onto the ITMX getting in the way of the collimating lenses. Should be easy to solve though. Does anyone know if there is a ITMX pick off beam I should be careful to avoid? |
Attachment 1: ITMX_oplev_plan.png
|
|
11160
|
Mon Mar 23 13:27:33 2015 |
ericq | Update | SUS | ITMX oplev quadrant gains unbalanced |
I've been poking around the oplev situation. One thing I came across regarding ITMX was that the gain on segment 4 seems to be about higher than the other segments. I was led to believe this by steering the optic around, and looking at the counts on each quadrant when the other 3 were dark.
Putting a gain of 0.86 (the ratio of the other segments' max counts over segment 4's max counts) in the segment 4 FM flattens the 1 Hz peak in the ITMX_OL_SUM spectrum, as well as significantly reducing the sub-Hz coherence of the sum with the individual quandrant counts. This is what I would expect from reducing the coupling of angular motion due to quadrant gain mismatch into the sum.
Here are the ITMX_OL_SUM spectra before and after (oplev servos are off).

The "burps" and control filter saturations are still unexplained. Investigations continue... |
Attachment 1: olsum.png
|
|
5660
|
Thu Oct 13 14:23:09 2011 |
steve | Update | SUS | ITMX oplev with 3 mm beam on qpd |
I replaced the JDSU-Uniphase 1125P by 1103P He/Ne laser. This new laser had 2.8 mW output yesterday. It degraded to 0.5 mW by this morning.
The beam size on the QPD is ~3 mm This should give us better sensitivity. These are not the perfect lenses at all, but we have them here.
On the other hand, there are still some coherence below 1 Hz, so the laser intensity noise or clipping dominating this part of the spectrum.
|
Attachment 1: ITMXoplev1103p#2.png
|
|
Attachment 2: ITMXoplev.png
|
|
16843
|
Tue May 10 16:31:14 2022 |
Tega | Update | BHD | ITMX optlev return beam steered to QPD |
Followed the steps below to complete the ITMX optlev installation. The ITMX optlev return beam now reaches its QPD without being blocked by the input steering mirror.
Although, I centered the ITMX optlev readout, this was not done when the XARM flashing is maximized bcos the IMC chamber was being worked on, so this should be done later when the IR beam is back.
Quote: |
Next steps:
- The Oplev beam paths need to be adjusted.
- The ongoing beam steering mirror is blocking the returning beam, so the ongoing path needs to be changed.
- First setup two irises to save ingoing path.
- Then make space for the returning beam by changing the steering mirror positions.
- Then recover the ingoing path to the center of irises.
- Steer the returning beam to the QPD.
- Then maximize the flashing on XARM and center the oplev to save this position.
|
|
11755
|
Thu Nov 12 09:15:56 2015 |
Steve | Update | SUS | ITMX osems |
The ITMX OSEMS are oscillating. |
Attachment 1: ITMX.png
|
|
5337
|
Fri Sep 2 17:52:16 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | SUS | ITMX realigned |
The new ITMX was aligned by changing the DC biases.
The resultant DC biases are reasonably small.
C1:SUS-ITMX_PIT_COMM = -0.2909
C1:SUS-ITMX_YAW_COMM = -0.0617
The alignment was done by trying to resonate the green light in the X arm cavity.
The spot position of the green light on the ITMX mirror looked good. This was confirmed by inserting a sensor card.
I did the OSEM mid-range adjustment and the rotation adjustment but at the end the OSEM DC voltage has changed due to the DC bias operation.
The OSEM rotation was approximately optimized so that all the face shadow sensors are sensitive to the POS motion but the SIDE shadow sensor is insensitive to the POS motion.
It needs a free swinging diagnosis. |
5342
|
Tue Sep 6 11:21:33 2011 |
Jenne | Update | SUS | ITMX rehung (Friday) |
[Jenne, Katrin, Jamie]
I'm a bad kid, and forgot to elog my Friday morning work...
Bob gave me back ITMX after a 48hour bake at 80C + clean RGA scan Friday morning after coffee and doughnuts. Katrin helped me put it back in the suspension wire.
While I was leveling the optic (making sure the scribe lines on each side of the optic are at the same height off the table), Katrin cut some new viton for replacement EQ stops. The optic was missing one lower earthquake stop (the one that Jamie noticed last week), and somehow one other rubber piece came out of the EQ stop on another lower screw while we were re-suspending the optic. We put the new stops in, and then checked the balance of the test mass.
The oplev is still the HeNe laser that is leveled to the level optical table in the cleanroom. The lever arm is ~1.5 meters, and over that distance the reflected beam was pointed "up" in pitch by ~1.5mm, which is less than one beam diameter of the HeNe. This is well within our ability to correct using the OSEMs.
We then locked the test mass, and installed it in the chamber. I approximately did the half-voltage centering of the OSEMs, leaving the fine-tuning to Kiwamu for after lunch. |
15585
|
Sat Sep 19 19:14:59 2020 |
Koji | Update | General | ITMX released / ETMY UR magnet knocked off |
There were two SUSs which didn't look normal.
- ITMX was easily released by the bias slider -> Shake the pitch slider and while all the OSEM values are moving, turn on the damping control (with x10 large watchdog threshold)
- ETMY has UR OSEM 0V output. This means that there is no light. And this didn't change at all with the slider move.
- Went to the Y table and tried to look at the coils. It seems that the UR magnet is detached from the optic and stuck in the OSEM.
We need a vent to fix the suspension, but until then what we can do is to redistribute the POS/PIT/YAW actuations to the three coils. |
Attachment 1: IMG_6218.jpeg
|
|
12489
|
Tue Sep 13 19:02:56 2016 |
Teng | Update | General | ITMX sensor |
[Lydia,Teng]
Something strange happened to the ITMX osem reading around 4.pm. PDT as shown below.
Also the there was no response of the reading as we adjusted the PITCH and YAW. :(
Note that we restarted the slow machine: c1susaux,c1ausex this afternoon because of the unresponced interface.
|
Attachment 1: 47.png
|
|
Attachment 2: 34.png
|
|
13182
|
Thu Aug 10 09:31:57 2017 |
Steve | Update | SUS | ITMX sensor voltage |
There must be some bad connection
Quote: |
Somewhere between CDS model restarts and the IFO venting, ITMX got stuck.
I shook it loose using the usual bias slider technique. It appears to be free now, I was able to lock the green beam on a TEM00 mode without touching the green input pointing. The ITMX Oplev spot has also returned to within its MEDM display bounds.
|
|
Attachment 1: 9daysITMX.png
|
|
Attachment 2: vacGlitchITMX.png
|
|
12520
|
Tue Sep 27 18:04:50 2016 |
Lydia | Update | SUS | ITMX slow channels down, ITMY diagonalization update |
[Teng, Lydia]
When we plugged in the back cables yesterday on the whitening boxes after switching them, two of the ITMX PDMon channels (UR and LR) got stuck at 0. This caused me to believe ITMX was still stuck even when it was freed. However, it was left in a stuck state overnight and freed again today after this issue was discovered. The alignment sliders have been set to 0 as a safety net to keep ITMX from getting stuck again if c1susaux is restarted again. We switched the cables back and the problem was still there.
The ITMY UL whitening filter problem, which the cables were originally switched to diagnose, was also still there. Ericq suggested we turn off all the whitening filters in order to get diagonalization data that would not show a phase difference between coils. We ran the diagonalization again with all the dewhitening filters off and got much cleaner results, with no visible cross-coupling peaks remaining between the degrees of freedom (see attachemnt 1). We did not apply this matrix to the damping, however, because there are elements which have the wrong sign compared to the ideal matrix. Significant adjustments to the output matrix will probably need to be made if this result is to be used. We also verified that the phase problem had been solved in DTT, where we saw the same sign discrepancies as in the matrix below.
Damping can be turned back on, using the old, non-diagonalized matrix currently in effect. There is enough free swing data to diagonalize ITMY now, so feel free to mess with it.
Matrix (wrong signs red, suspiciously small elements orange):
pit yaw pos side butt
UL 1.633 0.138 1.224 0.136 0.984
UR -0.202 -1.768 1.179 0.132 -1.028
LR -2.000 0.094 0.776 0.107 1.001
LL -0.165 2.000 0.821 0.111 -0.987
SD 0.900 1.131 -1.708 1.000 -0.107
|
Attachment 1: ITMY_diagsuccess.pdf
|
|
13173
|
Tue Aug 8 20:48:06 2017 |
gautam | Update | SUS | ITMX stuck |
Somewhere between CDS model restarts and the IFO venting, ITMX got stuck.
I shook it loose using the usual bias slider technique. It appears to be free now, I was able to lock the green beam on a TEM00 mode without touching the green input pointing. The ITMX Oplev spot has also returned to within its MEDM display bounds. |
12518
|
Mon Sep 26 19:48:09 2016 |
Lydia | Update | SUS | ITMX stuck again, ITMY whitening issue |
This afternoon around 2:45, ITMX started ringing up at ~.9Hz for about a minute and then got stuck again. When I noticed this evening, I tried to free it with the alignment sliders but was unable to see any signal on UL or UR. It also looks like the damping for ITMY was turned off at the same time ITMX got stuck (not at the start of its ring up). SRM also has a spike in its motion at this time, and another one minute later that ended up with the LR OSEM at a much higher level, though the mirror does not appear to be stuck. We didn't see any strange behavior from any of the other optics.
Teng and I were working on diagnosing a problem with the ITMY UL whitening, but by the time we disconnected any applicable cables, the damping for ITMY was already off. Later we unplugged the ITMX PD whitening cables after verifying that the ITMX damping was also already off. This problem may have occured earlier, while Teng, Eric, and I were examining and pushing in the cables at 1X5 without unplugging anything.
We found that the reason for the bad phase on the ITMY free swing data is because the whitening filter for UL is not being properly turned on. We are in the process of investigating the source of this problem. Right now all the cables to the PD whitening boxes in 1X5 are switched between ITMY and ITMX.
|
Attachment 1: 44.png
|
|
Attachment 2: 26.png
|
|
16837
|
Mon May 9 18:43:03 2022 |
Anchal | Update | BHD | ITMX table layout corrected |
As I went to correct the ITMX Oplev mirrors, I found that both mirrors were placed in very different positions than the design position. Part of the reason I think was to preserve outside oplev path, and party because a counterweight was in ITMXOL1 position. I had to do following steps to correct this:
- I noted down level meter readings of the table before making any changes.
- I removed the counter weight from near the center of the table.
- I placed the Oplev mirrors in the nominal positions.
- I placed the counter weight near previous position.
- I moved a edge hanging counter weight to get back the level meter to its previous state coarsely.
- Then I used dataviewer to find the previous OSEM PD monitor values and changed ITMX PIT and YAW to come closer to those PD values. And voila, I regained the flashing on Xarm. I nudged the ITMX pit and yaw bit more to maximize it.
- I then went back to aligning the Oplevs properly.
- Then I adjusted the POP mirrors to get the beam back through center of window. This was very tricky and took a lot of time.
- Now the beam is going through near center and the oplev beams are far away enough from POP_SM5.
- On the outside table, I noted the POP beam and the oplev beam. I corrected the pit of the returning beam to get the oplev beam at nominal height on outside table.
ITMX Sat Amp is flaky
[Anchal, Paco]
During the above work, i must have kicked the cable between the vacuum flange and the satellite amplifier box for ITMX. This disconnected all the OSEMs and Coils. We tried several things to debug this and finally found that nudging the connections on Sat Amp box brought the OSEMs and coils back online. Note that the connector was not partially out or in a state that obviously showed disconnection of the pins. I'm glad we are putting in new electronics soon for the vertex optics as well.
Next steps:
- I showed Tega the returning oplev beam and the POP beam coming out of the ITMX chamber.
- The Oplev beam paths need to be adjusted.
- The ongoing beam steering mirror is blocking the returning beam, so the ongoing path needs to be changed.
- First setup two irises to save ingoing path.
- Then make space for the returning beam by changing the steering mirror positions.
- Then recover the ingoing path to the center of irises.
- Steer the returning beam to the QPD.
- Then maximize the flashing on XARM and center the oplev to save this position.
- POP beam needs to be directed to previous setup on far side of table.
- The POP beam is coming out at the rising angle.
- This is good for us if we do bit unconventional stuff and transfer the beam to other side of table at an elevated height. Given how close all the beams are coming out of the viewport, I think this is the best solution in terms of saving time.
- Get the beam down to the old setup which was camera and photodiodes all aligned.
|
5752
|
Fri Oct 28 03:42:50 2011 |
kiwamu | Update | LSC | ITMX table needs to be refined |
(POX)
The POX beam had been 80% clipped at a black glass beam dump of the POX11 RFPD.
I steered the first mirror in the POX path to fix the clipping. Then the beam was realigned onto the RFPD.
However the beam is still very close to the black glass, because the incident angle to the second mirror is not 45 deg .
We need to refine the arrangement of the POX11 optics a bit more so that the beam will never be clipped at the black glass.
(POP)
The POP optics also need to be rearranged to accommodate one more RFPD.
Additionally Rana, Suresh and I discussed the possible solutions of POP22/110 and decided to install a usual PD (PDA10A or similar) instead of a custom-made.
So a plan for the POP detectors will be something like this:
+ design an optical layout.
+ buy a 2 inch lens whose focul length is long enough ( #5743 )
+ rearrange the optics and install POP22/110
+ lay down a long SMA cable which sends the RF signal from POP22/110 to the LSC rack.
+ install a power splitter just before the demod board so that the signal is split into the 22MHz demoad board and 110MHz demod board.
=> make sure we have a right splitter for it.
+ install a band pass filter after the power splitter in each path.
=> A 22MHz band pass filter is already in hand. Do we have 110MHz band pass filter somewhere in the lab ?
The picture here shows the latest configuration on the ITMX table.

Quote from #5743 |
RF photo diodes POP55 and POX11 are installed. The beams are aligned to the photo diodes.
|
|
4125
|
Fri Jan 7 15:17:37 2011 |
steve | Update | Cameras | ITMX video monitor has tower wide view |
The Watec 902, 1/2" CCD camera got new Tamron lens: 1/2" 10-40mm F/1.4 manual iris. IR corrective lens. It is designed to have the same focal point in the IR as
in the visible light range. However, as the depth of field in the IR range is very narrow, focus adjustment should be done carefully in the IR.
Now you can see the sus tower that will make alignment easier.
|
4916
|
Thu Jun 30 01:50:02 2011 |
Jenne | Update | SUS | ITMX whitening, ETMX left free swinging |
While closing up the whitening shop for the night, I noticed that the ITMX whitening state (Whitening "On") is opposite that of all other suspensions (they all have Whitening "Off"). I don't know which way is correct, but I assume they should all be the same. Once all the whitening and BO testing is done, we should make sure that they're all the way we want them to be.
Also, Koji and I are leaving ETMX free swinging. That's the way we found it, presumably from Jamie's BO testing at the end station today. We don't know what the optic's story is, so we're leaving it the way we found it. Jamie (or whomever left it free swinging), can you please restore it when it is okay to do so? Thanks! |
2367
|
Tue Dec 8 16:27:13 2009 |
Jenne | Update | COC | ITMX wiped |
Jenne, Kiwamu, Koji, Alberto, Steve, Bob
ITMX was wiped without having to move it.
After 'practice' this morning on ETMY, Kiwamu and I successfully wiped ITMX by leaning into the chamber to get at the front face.
Most notable (other than the not moving it) was that inspection with the fiber light before touching showed many very small particles on the coated part of the optic (this is versus ETMY, where we saw very few, but larger particles). The after-wiping fiber light inspection showed many, many fewer particles on the optical surface. I have high hopes for lower optical loss here! |
5297
|
Wed Aug 24 12:08:56 2011 |
jamie | Update | SUS | ITMX, ETMX, ETMY free swinging |
ITMX: 998245556
ETMX, ETMY: 998248032 |
5055
|
Thu Jul 28 16:26:42 2011 |
steve | Update | SUS | ITMX, ITMY & ETMY OSEM gains adjusted |
OSEM damping gains were adjusted by observing real time dataviewer to get Q of 5
OSEMs were kicked up one by one with 200 counts ~1sec. The error signal was optimized to get 1/2 of exitation amplitude at the 5th sinusoid wave.
C1: SUS-ITMX_SUSPOS_N1 gain 111 -> 65, PIT 7.2 -> 8, YAW 12 -> 6, SIDE 280
ITMY 277 -> 120, 19.2 -> 7, 24 -> 19, 420 -> 470
ETMY 10 -> 32, 20 -> 3, 20 -> 10, 50
ETMX 22 -> 25, 3, 3, -170
ETMX having problems: 1, YAW can not be excited
2, SIDE has no error signal in dataviewer. Sensing voltage on MEDM screen 0.142V
|
5291
|
Tue Aug 23 17:45:22 2011 |
jamie | Update | SUS | ITMX, ITMY, ETMX clamped and moved to edge of tables |
In preparation for tomorrow's drag wiping and door closing, I have clamped ITMX, ITMY, and ETMX with their earthquake stops and moved the suspension cages to the door-edge of their respective tables. They will remain clamped through drag wiping.
ETMY was left free-swinging, so we will clamp and move it directly prior to drag wiping tomorrow morning. |
16906
|
Fri Jun 10 13:52:22 2022 |
JC | Update | OPLEV Tables | ITMX, ITMY, and Vertex Table Beam Paths |
I have at taken photos and added arrows which signify the beam paths for ITMX, ITMY, and Vertex Oplev tables. |
Attachment 1: DCE4F1D7-5AE0-491C-8AF6-F8B659C0787E_1_105_c.jpeg
|
|
Attachment 2: 4B24C891-654D-4C51-A8D9-D316364FCF68_1_105_c.jpeg
|
|
Attachment 3: F5B115E5-885F-463C-9645-BB2EB73B6144_1_201_a.jpeg
|
|
799
|
Tue Aug 5 12:52:28 2008 |
Yoichi | Update | SUS | ITMX, SRM OSEM spectra |
Free swinging spectra of ITMX and SRM.
ITMX seems to be ok after yesterday's work, though the OSEM DC values are still a bit off from the normal value of 0.9.
(ITMX OSEM values: UL=1.12, UR=1.38, LR=0.66, LL=0.41, SIDE=0.66)
SRM is still clearly wrong. |
Attachment 1: ITMX-2008_08_05-morning.pdf
|
|
Attachment 2: SRM-2008_08_05-morning.pdf
|
|
14584
|
Mon Apr 29 16:34:27 2019 |
gautam | Update | Electronics | ITMX/IMTY mis-labelling fixed at 1X4 and 1X5 |
After the X and Y arm naming conventions were changed, the labelling of the electronics in the eurocrates was not changed 😞 😔 😢 . This meant that when we hooked up the new Acromag crate, all the slow ITMX channels were in fact connected to the physical ITMY optic. I ♦️fixed♦️ the labelling now - Attachments #1 and #2 show the coil driver boards and SUS PD whitening boards correctly labelled. Our electronics racks are in desperate need of new photographs.
The "Y" arm runs in the EW direction, while the "X" arm runs in the NW direction as of April 29 2018.
ITMX was freed. ITMY is being worked on is also free.. |
Attachment 1: IMG_7400.JPG
|
|
Attachment 2: IMG_7401.JPG
|
|
6600
|
Thu May 3 21:13:48 2012 |
Koji | Summary | SUS | ITMX/PRM/BS OPLEV aligned |
[Jenne/Den/Koji]
We locked Xarm/Yarm and manually alignmed ITMX/ITMY/BS/ETMX/ETMY/PZT1/PZT2.
ITMY OPLEV was largely misaligned ==> The beam was centered on the QPD.
----
Then we aligned PRM using SB locking PRMI.
We noticed that OPLEV servo does not work. It made the PRM just noiser.
We went into the PRM table and found that the OPLEV beam was clipped in the vacuum chamber.
We tried to maximize the reflected beam from the window by touching the steering mirrors at the injection side.
Then the reflected beam was introduced to the center of the QPD.
After the alignment, the OPLEV QPD SUM increased to 4000ish from 200ish.
According to the OPLEV trend data, this is a nominal value of the QPD SUM.
Now the OPLEV servo does not go crazy.
--
BS OPLEV beam was centered on the QPD. |
2469
|
Wed Dec 30 20:33:36 2009 |
rana, alberto | Configuration | Cameras | ITMY & MC2 Camera work |
We restored the good state of the ITMY camera and neatened both the MC2 and ITMY camera.
The MC2 camera was driving a triple T jungle into some random cables and spoiling the image. We removed all T's and the MC2 camera now drives only The Matrix.
The ITMY camera was completely unmounted and T'd. So it was misaligned just by the force of gravity acting on its BNC cable. We swapped the lens for a reasonable sized one and remounted it in its can. We then used orange cable ties to secure the power and BNC cable for the MC2 and ITMY cameras so that tugging on the cables doesn't misalign the cameras. This is part of the camera's SOP.
No more driving 50 Ohm cables and T's with video cables, Steve! If you need a portable video, just use a spigot of the Matrix and then you can control it with a web browser.
  
I also wiped out the D40's memory card after uploading all of the semi-useful files to the Picasa page. |
16370
|
Fri Oct 1 12:12:54 2021 |
Stephen | Update | BHD | ITMY (3002) CAD layout pushed to Box |
Koji requested current state of BHD 3D model. I pushed this to Box after adding the additional SOSs and creating an EASM representation (also posted, Attachment 1). I also post the PDF used to dimension this model (Attachment 2). This process raised some points that I'll jot down here:
1) Because the 40m CAD files are not 100% confirmed to be clean of any student license efforts, we cannot post these files to the PDM Vault or transmit them this way. When working on BHD layout efforts, these assemblies which integrate new design work therefore must be checked for most current revisions of vault-managed files - this Frankenstein approach is not ideal but can be managed for this effort.
2) Because the current files reflect the 40m as built state (as far as I can tell), I shared the files in a zip directory without increasing the revisions. It is unclear whether revision control is adequate to separate [current 40m state as reflected in CAD] from [planned 40m state after BHD upgrade]. Typically a CAD user would trust that we could find the version N assembly referenced in the drawing from year Y, so we wouldn't hesitate to create future design work in a version N+1 assembly file pending a current drawing. However, this form of revision control is not implemented. Perhaps we want to use configurations to separate design states (in other words, create a parallel model of every changed component, without creating paralle files - these configurations can be selected internal to the assembly without a need to replace files)? Or more simply (and perhaps more tenuously), we could snapshot the Box revisions and create a DCC page which notes the point of departure for BHD efforts?
Anyway, the cold hard facts:
- Box location: 40m/40m_cad_models/Solidworks_40m (LINK)
- Filenames: 3002.zip and 3002 20211001 ITMY BHD for Koji presentation images.easm (healthy disregard for concerns about spaces in filenames) |
Attachment 1: 3002_20211001_ITMY_BHD_for_Koji_presentation_images.easm
|
Attachment 2: 40m_upgrade_layout_20200611-ITMY_Beam_Dim.pdf
|
|
2777
|
Tue Apr 6 22:54:34 2010 |
Koji | Update | SUS | ITMY (south) aligned |
Kiwamu and Koji
ITMY (south) was aligned with regard to the 40m-long oplev with the green laser pointer. Now the cavity is waiting for the green light injected from the end table
The OSEMs were adjusted with the aligned optics, but still a bit off from the center. They need to be adjusted again.
One round-shaped counter-weight removed from the table. Some counter weights are moved.
Some tools and the level gauge were removed from the table.
BAD news: I could clearly see scatter of the green beam path because of the dusts in the arm tube. Also many dusts are seen on the ITM surface.
Picture of the ETM - reflection from the ITM is hitting the mirror and the suspension structures.

1. Shoot the ITM center with the green beam.
- Two persons with walkie-talkies required for this work.
- Turn on the end green pointer. We could see the long trace of the beam sliced by the beam tube wall.
- Look at the tube peeping mirror for the CCD.
- Adjust yaw such that the beam trace on the tube wall is parallel to the arm.
- Adjust pitch such that the beam trace on the tube gets longer. This means that spot gets closer to the ITM.
- Continue pitch adjustment until some scatter appears on the ITM tower.
- Once the spot appears on the tower, you can easily adjust it on the mirror
2. Adjust pitch/yaw bias such that the reflection hits the ETM.
- Initially the ITM alignment is totally bad. ==> You clealy see the spot on the wall somewhere close to the ITM.
- Adjust pitch/yaw bias such that the spot goes farther as far as possible.
- Once you hit the suspension tower, the scatter is obviously seen from the peeping mirror.
- You can match the incident beam and the scattering of the reflection. You also can see the reflection from the ETM towards the ITM as the spot size gets huge (1/2 tube diameter).
- We found that the bias is ~-2 for pitch and ~-6 for yaw.
3. Go into the chamber. Check the table leveling.
- Open the light door.
- I found that the table is not leveled. Probably it drifted after the move of the weight (i.e. MOS removal).
- Removed one of the round-shaped weight. Moved the other weights such that the table was leveled.
4. Remove the bias for yaw and rotate suspension tower such that the reflection hit the center of the ETM.
- Removed the yaw bias. This makes the reflected spot totally off from the ETM.
- Rotate suspension tower so that the beam can approximately hit the ETM.
- Look at the peeping mirror, the beam is aligned to the ETM.
5. Adjust OSEMs
- Push/pull the OSEMs such that we have the OSEM outputs at the half of the full scale.
6. Adjust alignment by the bias again.
- Moving OSEMs changes the alignment. The pitch/yaw biases were adjusted to have the beam hitting on the ETM.
- Bias values at the end of the work: Pitch -0.8159 / Yaw -1.2600
7. Close up the chamber
- Remove the tools and the level gauge.
- Close the light door. |
4066
|
Fri Dec 17 00:30:05 2010 |
Koji | Update | IOO | ITMY / SRM / BS / PRM OPLEVs aligned |
[Steve and Koji]
The invac OPLEV mirrros were aligned before we get to the PMA party.
The OPLEV mirrors were adjusted in accordance with the optical layout.
Surprisingly the optical layout was enough precise such that we have the healthy red beams on the optical tables.
Steve placed the apertures at the position of the returning spots while I shook the stack to check if the range of the spot motion is sufficient.
The sole thing that has been deviated from the optical layout was that the SRM returning beam had to be reroute
as the SRM has better reflectivity on the AR surface in stead of the HR one. |
4069
|
Fri Dec 17 03:37:47 2010 |
rana | Update | SUS | ITMY / SRM / BS / PRM OPLEVs aligned |
Quote: |
The sole thing that has been deviated from the optical layout was that the SRM returning beam had to be reroute
as the SRM has better reflectivity on the AR surface in stead of the HR one.
|
I suppose that if we were really clever we would intentionally choose either the AR or HR surface so as to minimize the effect of the thermal lensing and/or thermal expansion from the locked interferometer absorption. |
17298
|
Tue Nov 22 10:29:31 2022 |
Anchal | Summary | SUS | ITMY Coil Strengths Balanced |
I followed this procedure to balance the coil strengths on ITMY. The position sensor was created by closing PSL shutter so that IR laser is free running, and locking the green laser to YARM, this makes C1:ALS-BEATY_FINE_PHASE_OUT a position sensor for ITMY. The oplev channels C1:SUS-ITMY_OL_PIT_IN1 and C1:SUS-ITMY_OL_YAW_IN1 were used for PIT and YAW sensors. Everything else followed the procedure. The coil gains were changed as follow:
C1:SUS-ITMY_ULCOIL_GAIN : 1.036 -> 1.061
C1:SUS-ITMY_URCOIL_GAIN : -1.028 -> -0.989
C1:SUS-ITMY_LRCOIL_GAIN : 0.930 -> 0.943
C1:SUS-ITMY_LLCOIL_GAIN : -1.005 -> -1.007
I used this notebook and this diaggui to do this balancing. |
14484
|
Mon Mar 18 17:06:12 2019 |
gautam | Update | Optical Levers | ITMY HeNe replaced |
Oplev HeNe was replaced this afternoon. We did some HeNe shuffling:
- A new HeNe was being used for the fiber illumination demo at EX. We took that out and decided to use it as the new ITMX HeNe. It had 2.6mW output at 632nm (measured with the Ophir power meter)
- Old ETMY HeNe was used for fiber illumination demo.
- Old ITMX HeNe was putting out no light - it will be disposed.
Attachment #1 shows the RIN and Attachment #2 and #3 show the PIT and YAW TFs with the new HeNe.
The ITMX Oplev path is still not great - the ingoing beam is within 2mm of clipping on a 2" lens used in the POX path, and there is a bunch of scattered red light everywhere. We should take the opportunity when the chamber is open to try and have a better layout (it may be tricky to optize without touching the two in-vacuum steering optics).
Quote: |
I'll ask Chub to replace it this afternoon.
|
|
Attachment 1: OLRIN.pdf
|
|
Attachment 2: OL_PIT.pdf
|
|
Attachment 3: OL_YAW.pdf
|
|
5198
|
Thu Aug 11 18:30:40 2011 |
Koji | Update | SUS | ITMY OSEM adjustment |
[Jamie, Koji]
ITMX OSEMs were adjusted so as to have the right DC numbers and the more uniform response to POS excitation.
It is waiting for the free-swinging test.
- ITMX was moved from its position to the north side of the table.
- The table was rebalanced.
- We found that the output of the LR OSEM has an excess noise compared with the other OSEMs.
We tried to swap the LR and SD OSEMs, but the SD OSEM (placed at the LR magnet) showed
the same excess noise at around 10-50Hz.
- We found that one of the EQ stops was touching the mirror. By removing this friction, all of the OSEMs
come to show similar power spectra. Good!
- Then we started to use LOCKIN technique to measure the sensitivity of the OSEMs to the POS excitation.
Originally the response of the OSEMs was as follows
UL 3.4 UR 4.3
LL 0 LR 2.5
After the adjustment of the DC values, final values became as follows
UL 3.9 UR 4.4
LL 3.9 LR 3.2
- We decided to close the light door. |
9231
|
Thu Oct 10 11:46:43 2013 |
Jenne | Update | SUS | ITMY OpLev Noise |
For my work designing a cost function, so that I can try out new feedback servo designs on the oplevs, I wanted to know what the dark noise of an oplev is. Since the pitch and yaw channels are divided by the sum channel, when the laser is off, the noise in the pitch and yaw channels looks much higher than it really is. So, I collected some data from the 4 individual quadrants of the ITMY oplev, when the laser was on (but damping was off), and when the laser was off. I used the values of the oplev input matrix to re-create the non-normalized pitch and yaw signals. What I see is that we have some kind of real signal below 1 kHz, but we're hitting the noise at around 1 kHz. So, we definitely don't want to use oplev error signal information above 1 kHz when designing new servos.
The last word in the title is "off". OSEM damping was on, but the oplev damping was off. These are uncalibrated, because the calibrations that we have to go from counts to microradians are for the normalized signals.

|
5429
|
Fri Sep 16 00:08:30 2011 |
Paul | Update | SUS | ITMY Oplev QPD dark and bright noise spectra |
I tried again at plotting the ITMY_QPD noise spectra in for dark and bright operation. Before we had the strange situation where the dark noise seemed higher, but Kiwamu noticed this was caused by dividing by the SUM before the testpoint I was looking at. This time I tried just multiplying by the measured SUM for bright and dark to normalise the spectra against each other. The results looks more reasonable now, the dark noise is lower than the bright noise for a start! However, the dark noise spectrum now doesn't look the same as the one I showed in my previous post. |
Attachment 1: ITMY_oplev_dark_noise_vs_bright_noise.pdf
|
|
5427
|
Thu Sep 15 22:26:32 2011 |
Paul | Update | SUS | ITMY Oplev QPD dark noise PSD |
I took a dark noise measurement for the ITMY QPD, for comparison with measurements of the oplev noise later on. Initially I was plotting the data from test points after multiplication by the oplev matrix (i.e. the OLPIT_IN1 / OLYAW_IN1), but found that the dark noise level seemed higher than the bright noise level (!?). Kiwamu realised that this is because at that test point the data is already divided by QPD SUM, thus making the dark noise level appear to be greater than the bright level, since QPD SUM is much smaller for the dark measurements. The way around this was to record the direct signals from each quadrant before the division. I took a power spectrum of the dark noise from each quadrant, then added them in quadrature, then divided by QPD SUM at the end to get an uncalibrated PSD. Next I will convert these into the equivalent for pitch and yaw noise spectra. To calibrate the plots in radians per root Hz requires some specific knowledge of the oplev path, so I won't do this until I have adjusted the path. |
Attachment 1: ITM_dark_QPD_PSD.pdf
|
|
10253
|
Tue Jul 22 15:54:19 2014 |
ericq | Update | SUS | ITMY Oplev Recentered |
ITMY oplev was nearly clipping in yaw, causing wonky behavior (POY lock popping in and out frequently). I recentered it and the arm is locking fine now. |
16780
|
Thu Apr 14 18:34:51 2022 |
Paco | Summary | BHD | ITMY Oplev reinstalled (Re: 2 in oplev mirrors incompatible with LMR2V) |
[Paco, Yehonathan]
We installed ITMYOL1 and ITMYOL2 on the ITMY chamber. We aligned the ITMY OpLev beam and closed the loop successfully, we then had a second round of YARM aligment, where we brought the Y peak transmission up from 0.04 counts to 0.09 counts (up by a factor of two). We still couldn't close the YARM loop but we have a better alignment. |
5436
|
Fri Sep 16 16:34:54 2011 |
Paul | Update | SUS | ITMY SRM oplev telescope plan |
I've calculated a suitable collimating telescope for the ITMY/SRM oplev laser, based on the specs for the soon-to-arrive 2mW laser (model 1122/P) available here: http://www.jdsu.com/ProductLiterature/hnlh1100_ds_cl_ae.pdf
Based on the fact that the 'beam size' value and 'divergence angle' value quoted don't match up, I am assuming that the beam radius value of 315um is _not_ the waist size value, but rather the beam size at the output coupler. From the divergence angle I calculated a 155um waist, (zR = 12cm). This gives the quoted beam size of about 316um at a distance of 8.5" away from the waist. This makes me think that the output coupler is curved and the waist is at the back of the laser, or at least 8.5" from the output coupler.
The collimating telescope gives a waist of size 1142um (zR=6.47m) at a distance of 1.427m away from the original laser waist, using the following lens combo:
L1 f=-0.15 @ 0.301m
L2 f=0.3 @ 0.409m
This should be fine to get a small enough spot size (1-2mm) on the QPDs.
|
Attachment 1: ITMY_SRM_telescope.png
|
|
13830
|
Thu May 10 11:38:19 2018 |
gautam | Update | General | ITMY UL |
Looking at Steve's plot, I was reminded of the ITMY UL OSEM issue. The numbers don't make sense to me though - 300um of DC shift in UL with negligible shifts in the other coils should have made a much bigger DC shift in the Oplev spot position. |
Attachment 1: ITMY_UL.pdf
|
|
975
|
Mon Sep 22 12:06:58 2008 |
rob | Update | SUS | ITMY UL OSEM |
Last week I found the ITMY UL OSEM dead. I went around and checked the connections on the various flat ribbon cables
in the suspension control chain; pushing hard on the rack end of the long cable that goes from the sus electronics rack to the
ITMY sat amplifier fixed the problem. It's been fine since then.
NB: A visual inspection of the cable connection would not have revealed a problem. You just can't trust those flat
ribbon connectors with the hook latches. |