40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab CAML OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 106 of 357  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Categoryup Subject
  347   Thu Feb 28 19:49:21 2008 robUpdateElectronicsRF Monitor (StocMon)


With Ben, we hooked up the RF Monitor box into the PSL rack and created 4 EPICS channels for the outputs:


The power cable bringing +15V to the preamplifier on the PSL table should be replaced eventually.

I changed the names of these channels to the more appropriate (and informative, as they're coming from the RFAMPD):


I also added them in an aesthetically sound manner to the C1IOO_LockMC.adl screen and put them in trends. Along the way, I also lost whatever Alberto had done to make these monitors read zero when there's no light on the diode. It doesn't appear to be written down anywhere, and would have been lost with a reboot anyway. We'll need a more permanent & automatable solution for this.
  397   Sun Mar 23 10:42:54 2008 ValeraSummaryElectronicsRFAM of the RF stabilization box is measured
I reconstructed Tobin's setup to measure the RFAM after the RF stabilization box in the 166 MHz modulation path.
The setup consisted of the splitter and the mixer followed by the RF low pass filter and the SR560 (gain x100).
The RF level into splitter was 20 dBm. The Mini-Circuits ZLW-3H (17 dBm LO) mixer was used. The LO was taken
straight out of the splitter and the RF path was attenuated by 11 dBm, The DC out of the mixer was 700 mV.
The noise floor was measured with the RF input of the mixer terminated on 50 Ohm. The 45 MHz measurement
in broad band setting looks better than the noise floor at high frequencies. I am not sure what was wrong with
one or both of those measurements. The 9 MHz measurements are above the noise floor.

The RFAM meets the AdvLIGO requirements in the detection band (f > 10 Hz).

The attached zipped files are:
SRS003 9 MHz DC-200 Hz
SRS004 9 MHz DC-26 kHz
SRS006 45 MHz DC-200 Hz
SRS005 45 MHz DC-26 kHz
SRS007 Noise floor DC-200 Hz
SRS008 Noise floor DC-26 kHz
Attachment 1: RFAM.zip
Attachment 2: amplitudenoise.pdf
  398   Mon Mar 24 13:03:54 2008 robUpdateElectronicsHP4195A is back

The swept sine output looks totally normal from 500Mhz to 150MHz (measuring ~220mVrms below 300MHz -- 0dBm), where it abruptly transitions to a distorted waveform which the scope measures as having a frequency of ~25MHz and with 450mVrms (+6dBm). It then transitions again at some other part of the sweep to a cleaner-looking 25MHz waveform with ~1.2Vrms (+15dBm).

The HP4195A is back from repair. At first, it exhibited exactly the same behaviour for which it was sent in for repair, and which is described above (pillage from entry 337). After speaking with the repair tech on the phone, who tried to imply that the digital scope was tricking us, I plugged the output into our HP8591E spectrum analyzer, just to have firm ammunition to combat the repair guy's looniness. This led to even weirder behaviour, like no output and overload signals on the inputs (with nothing connected). After turning the unit on and off several times, and firmly seating (and screwing in) the DB9 connectors in the back of the unit, it appears to be working properly. Except for a brief glitch as it passes through 150MHz, the swept sine signal now appears normal, both on the scope and in the spectrum analyzer.

Apparently the whole thing is due to a loose connection somewhere in the box, which wasn't actually fixed by the repair, but has at least been temporarily fixed by me stumbling around with a screwdriver and then pushing the power button a couple of times.
  580   Thu Jun 26 22:08:33 2008 JenneUpdateElectronics3.7MHz bandstop filter in MC Servo
The 3.7MHz elliptical bandstop filter that I made during my SURF summer is now installed in the MC servo loop to reduce the noise at 3.7MHz.

I have taken transfer functions with and without the filter between TP1A and TP2A, with EXCA at -20dBm, using the HP4195A Network Analyzer. I have also taken power spectra of TP1A with and without the filter, and time domain data with the filter of OUT2 on the MC Servo Board and Qmon on the Demod board just before the MC servo board. The filter is between Qmon and OUT2 in the loop.

The UGF and phase margin don't change noticeably with and without the filter, and the MC still locks nicely (after the minor fiasco this afternoon), so I think it's okay. The UGF is around 57kHz, with about 38 degrees phase margin.

1 July 2008: I redid the plots. Same info, but the traces with and without the filters are now on the same graph for easier readability.
Attachment 1: MCLoopGainBoth.png
Attachment 2: TP1ASpectrumBoth.png
Attachment 3: QmonWithFilt.png
Attachment 4: MCOut2WithFilt.png
  584   Fri Jun 27 18:03:46 2008 JenneUpdateElectronicsAnother bad cable in the MC servo
Eric was helping me to measure the response of the LO input on the MC's Demod board, and when we disconnected the end of the cable between the demod board and the delay line phase shifter for the 29.5MHz oscillator, we noticed that the phase shifter's end of the cable was loose, like the connector wasn't fully connected. When we checked it by wiggling the connector, the SMA end fell off. I made a new SMA end for the cable, and reinstalled the cable. The MC locked as soon as I plugged the cable in, so everything seems good again. I tried to not change the cable length when I remade the connector, but the cable is shorter than it was by a small amount, due to the way the end fell off.
  585   Fri Jun 27 18:21:01 2008 JenneUpdateElectronicsResponse of the LO input on the MC demod board
The alarm handler has been flipping out saying that the LO input of the MC's demod board is too low, so at Rana's suggestion, Eric and I measured the response of the LO input. We used an SR345 function generator at 29.485MHz and several different amplitudes to make a table. The demod board should see an input from the LO between 0-2dBm. When I measured what was going into the LO input from the 29.5MHz delay line phase shifter, the LO input was seeing 4dBm. I'm going to put a 3dB attenuator between the phase shifter and the demod board.

Also, now that we have this table of response values, I'm going to change the settings of the alarm handler to something more reasonable.
Amplitude of 29.485MHz input sine wave [dBm]    |        Value of channel C1:IOO-MC_DEMOD_LO
--------------------------------------------    |        -----------------------------------
-10                                             |        -0.000449867
-8                                              |        -0.000449867
-6                                              |        -0.000449867
-4                                              |        0.000384331
-2                                              |        0.00526733
0                                               |        0.0199163
2                                               |        0.0492143
4                                               |        0.0931613
6                                               |        0.161523
8                                               |        0.229885
10                                              |        0.293364
  605   Mon Jun 30 15:56:22 2008 JenneUpdateElectronicsFixing the LO demod signal
To make the alarm handler happy, at Rana and John's suggestion I replaced R14 of the MC's Demod board, changing it from 4.99 Ohms to 4.99 kOhms. This increased the gain of the LO portion of the demod board by a factor of 10. Sharon and I have remeasured the table of LO input to the demod board, and the output on the C1:IOO-MC_DEMOD_LO channel:

Input Amplitude to LO input on demod board [dBm]: | Value of channel C1:IOO-MC_DEMOD_LO
------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------
-10 | -0.00449867
-8 | 0.000384331
-6 | 0.0101503
-4 | 0.0296823
-2 | 0.0882783
0 | 0.2543
2 | 0.542397
4 | 0.962335
6 | 1.65572
8 | 2.34911
10 | 2.96925
  888   Tue Aug 26 18:19:16 2008 ranaOmnistructureElectronicsResistor Noise at the 40m
As Stefan points out in his recent ISS ilog entries at LLO, Daniel Sigg recently wrote a
recommendation memo on resistor and capacitor
choices: T070016.

While working on the PMC I have had to use leaded resistors and wondered about the noise. As it turns
out we have the RN series of 1/4 W resistors from Stackpole Electronics. The RN series are
metal film resistors (datasheet attached); metal film is what Sigg recommends for lowest flicker

So we are OK for using the Stackpole 1/4 W leaded resistors in low noise circuits.
Attachment 1: SEI-RN_RNM.pdf
  915   Wed Sep 3 18:43:19 2008 YoichiConfigurationElectronicsTwo more active probes
I found two active probes, an HP41800A and a Tektronix P6201.
Thanks John for telling me you saw them before.
Now we have three active probes, wow !
We have to find or make a power supply for P6201.
The manual of the probe is attached.
Attachment 1: Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf
Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf Tektronix-P6201-active-probe.pdf
  939   Wed Sep 10 13:28:25 2008 YoichiSummaryElectronicsIOO rack lost -24V (recovered)
Alberto, Yoichi

This morning, the MC suddenly started to be unwilling to lock.
I found a large offset in the MC servo board.
It turned out that -24V was not supplied to the Eurocard crate of the IOO rack.
We found two loose cables (violet, that means -24V) around the cross connects with fuses.
We connected them back, and the -24V was back.
The MC locks fine now, and Alberto can continue his arm length experiment.
  1036   Wed Oct 8 22:23:43 2008 YoichiConfigurationElectronicsElectronics work bench cleanup
Yesterday, I cleaned up the electronics work bench. I figured that keeping the work bench
in order has larger effect on the work efficiency than buying expensive soldering stations.
Whoever works there should clean up the table after the work to the state shown on
the right side of the picture (at least).
If you leave the bench for a while (more than 30min) but intend to return later and
resume the work, please write your name and time on a piece of paper and put it on the bench.
Otherwise, your stuff can be taken away anytime.
Attachment 1: Cleanup.jpg
  1135   Fri Nov 14 17:41:50 2008 JenneOmnistructureElectronicsSweet New Soldering Iron
The fancy new Weller Soldering Iron is now hooked up on the electronics bench.

Accessories for it are in the blue twirly cabinet (spare tips of different types, CD, and USB cable to connect it to a computer, should we ever decide to do so.

Rana: the soldering iron has a USB port?
Attachment 1: newSolderingIron.JPG
  1139   Mon Nov 17 11:01:15 2008 AlbertoHowToElectronicsCalibrating the Frequency Standard of the Marconi
I locked the SRS Rubidium Frequency Standard FS275 to the the 1pps from the GPS. The specs from the manual provide a frequency accuracy of 5x10^-11, that is 5x10-4 @ 10 MHz, since this is the reference signal frequency we're are going to use.
The Marconi internal frequency standard is provided by a TCXO oscillator. The instrument can be set in either one of these ways: 1) Indirect Synchronization, by which the internal TCXO is phase-locked to the external frequency standard (i.e. the SRS FS275 in our case) 2) Direct Sync, in which the internal TCXO is bypassed and the frequency standard is the external one.

I checked the specs of both frequency standards and found:

SRS FS275: 5x10^-11 -> 5x10^-10 Hz @ 10 MHz

Marconi: here what the data sheet says is that "the temperature coefficient is 7 in 10^7 in the temperature range between 0 and 55 C" and so should be also the frequency accuracy.

The SRS FS275 seems more accurate than the TCXO therefore I'm going to set the Marconi on the direct external mode.
Attachment 1: 2023ASeriesOperatingManual.pdf
2023ASeriesOperatingManual.pdf 2023ASeriesOperatingManual.pdf 2023ASeriesOperatingManual.pdf 2023ASeriesOperatingManual.pdf
Attachment 2: SRS_FS275_Rubidium_Frequency_Standard.pdf
SRS_FS275_Rubidium_Frequency_Standard.pdf SRS_FS275_Rubidium_Frequency_Standard.pdf
  1146   Wed Nov 19 10:32:11 2008 AlbertoConfigurationElectronicsAll the Marconi Set to the Rubidium Frequency Standard
I placed the SRS Rubidium FS275 over the PSL rack, next to the frequency counter. This one and the Marconi on the PSL rack have been connected to the 10MHz output of the frequency standard. I set also the first Marconi, the one that used to drive the others, to external, direct frequency reference. Now it reads 166981718 Hz versus 166981725 Hz measured by the frequency counter: 8 Hz difference.
  1147   Wed Nov 19 18:02:18 2008 ranaConfigurationElectronicsAll the Marconi Set to the Rubidium Frequency Standard
Not sure what was going on before. I changed the frequency counter to use an AC coupled input, and had it average
for 50 seconds. The output now agrees with the Marconi front panel to less than 1 Hz. Its still not 0.000 Hz,
but not bad.
  1208   Tue Dec 30 18:51:18 2008 rana,yoichiConfigurationElectronicsIlluminator Power Supply reset
We noticed that none of the illuminators were working.

The switches were off on all the ports. After turning them on it still didn't work.

The +24 V Sorensen power supply which powers all of the illuminators had its OVP light on.
We turned it off, ramped the voltage to zero, turned it back on, and then went back to +24 V.

We then checked the operation of the illuminators; ETMY is still MIA.

Each of the illuminators sucks ~0.6-0.7 A when the (unlabeled) rheostat knob panel is set
to the "25" setting.

It seems pretty unwise, in the EMI sense, to be sending Amps of unshielded, high current,
switching supply outputs for 40m down the arms. This creates a huge antenna for radiating
the switching noise. I hereby assign minus 5 points to whoever designed this system.

Illuminator Upgrade:
- Use LEDs of a wavelength that the OSEMs don't see. LEDs are also cool so that the
  Suspension won't drift in alignment.

- Use 2 power supplies so that the power is balanced.

- Make is +/-12 V twisted AWG 14 wire so that the EMI is contained. Should also
  be shielded cable.
  1252   Sat Jan 24 11:50:24 2009 AlbertoConfigurationElectronicsPhotodiode Filters' Transfer Functions
I found an elog entry by Jenne with the measurement of the transfer functions of the filters of some of our photodetectors. Since it might turn useful to us these days, while I'm thinking about posting them on the wiki sometime, I also copy the link here:
Jenne's on the PD's TF

If we still had the data for those plots, it would be great. Do we have it?
  1315   Mon Feb 16 23:09:52 2009 ranaUpdateElectronicsMC Servo Board offset gone bad!

The attached plot shows that someone broke the MC_SUM_MON channel around 10:30 AM this past Wednesday the 11th. This is the EPICS monitor of the MC error point.

Come forward now with your confession and I promise that I won't let Steve hurt you.

Attachment 1: mcoff.png
  1326   Thu Feb 19 22:40:33 2009 KiwamuUpdateElectronicsPSL angle QPD

I checked a broken QPD, which was placed for PSL angle monitor, and finally I cocluded one segment of the quadrant diode was broken.

The broken segment has a offset voltage of -0.7V after 1st I-V amplifier. It means the diode segment has a current offset without any injection of light.

Tomorrow I will check a new QPD for replacement.

Kiwamu IZUMI


  1345   Mon Mar 2 16:27:40 2009 AlbertoConfigurationElectronicsMC Drum Mode SR560 Preamplifier Replaced

Today I checked out the SR560 around the lab. I confirmed that the one with the label "channel A noisy" is effectively mulfuctioning.

It was coonected to the lock-in amplifier set up for the drum mode peak readout.

I repleaced that with a working one.

  1407   Mon Mar 16 15:19:52 2009 OsamuDAQElectronicsSR785

I borrowed SR785 to measure AA, AI noise and TF.

  1445   Mon Mar 30 15:51:27 2009 steveUpdateElectronicsHP4291A left the lab to be repaired

Eric Gustafson is handling the old HP4291A rehabilitation. Tarac picked both units up today.

March of 2008 Tucker Electronics failed to fix it's intermittent ~25MHz 0.5V oscillation at the swept sine output

See 40m-elog id:398 on 3-24-2008 by Rob Ward


  1476   Sun Apr 12 19:31:43 2009 ranaSummaryElectronicsAmphony 2500 Headphones
We bought the Amphony 2500 Digital Wireless headphones recently. The other cheapo headphones we have are OK for control room use, but have a lot of noise
and are, therefore, not useful for noise hunting.

The new digital ones are pretty much noise-free. With the transmitter next to rosalba, you can walk halfway down the east arm and all around the MC area
before the reception goes bad. For real noise hunting, we will want to put the transmitter next to the BS chamber and take an analog pickoff from the DC PDs.

In the OMC diagram, we should put an AUDIO filterbank and wire it to the DAC so that we can do arbitrary IIR filtering on the audio signal.
  1664   Wed Jun 10 01:52:34 2009 AlbertoUpdateElectronicsMC length and Marconis' frequencies

Pete, Rob, Alberto,

yesterday we thought that some of the problems we were having in locking the IFO might be related to a change of the length of the mode cleaner. So today we decided to measure it again.

We followed the Sigg-Frolov technique (see 40m Wiki, Waldman, Fricke). For the record, the MC_AO input corresponds to IN2 on the MC Servo board.

We obtained: L = 27.092 +/- 0.001 m

From the new measurement we reset the frequencies of the Marconis to the following values:

33196450 Hz

132785800 Hz

165982250 Hz

199178700 Hz


  1681   Tue Jun 16 20:03:41 2009 AlbertoUpdateElectronicsRequirements on Wenzel Multiplier

For the 40m Upgrade, we plan to eliminate the Mach-Zehnder and replace it with a single EOM driven by all three modulation frequencies that we'll need: f1=11MHz, f2=5*f1=55MHz, fmc=29.5MHz.

A frequency generator will produce the three frequencies and with some other electronics we'll properly combine and feed them to the EOM.

The frequency generator will have two crystals to produce the f1 and fmc signals. The f2 modulation will be obtained by a frequency multiplier (5x) from the f1.

The frequency multiplier, for the way it works, will inevitably introduce some unwanted harmonics into the signals. These will show up as extra modulation frequencies in the EOM.

In order to quantify the effects of such unwanted harmonics on the interferometer and thus to let us set some limits on their amplitude, I ran some simulations with Optickle. The way the EOM is represented is by three RF modulators in series. In order to introduce the unwanted harmonics, I just added an RF modulator in series for each of them. I also made sure not to leave any space in between the modulators, so not to introduce phase shifts.

To check the effect at DC I looked at the sensing matrix and at the error signals. I considered the 3f error signals that we plan to use for the short DOFs and looked at how they depend on the CARM offset. I repeated the simulations for several possible amplitude of the unwanted harmonics. Some results are shown in the plots attached to this entry. 'ga' is the amplitude ratio of the unwanted
harmonics relative to the amplitude of the 11 & 55 MHz modulations.

Comparing to the case where there are no unwanted harmonics (ga = 0), one can see that not considerable effect on the error signals for amplitudes 40dB smaller than that of the main sidebands. Above that value, the REFL31I signals, that we're going to use to control PRCL, will start to be distorted: gain and linearity range change.

So 40 dB of attenuation in the unwanted harmonics is probably the minimum requirement on the frequency multiplier, although 60dB would provide a safer margin.

I'm still thinking how to evaluate any AC effect on the IFO.


** TODO: Plot DC sweeps with a wider range (+/- 20 pm). Also plot swept sines to look for changes in TFs out to ~10 kHz.

Attachment 1: SummaryOfResult.pdf
SummaryOfResult.pdf SummaryOfResult.pdf SummaryOfResult.pdf SummaryOfResult.pdf SummaryOfResult.pdf SummaryOfResult.pdf SummaryOfResult.pdf SummaryOfResult.pdf
  1724   Wed Jul 8 18:46:56 2009 DmassAoGElectronicsBeam Scan Funky

The beam scan (which has been living in the bridge subbasement for a bit now) is in a state of imperfection.

I noticed that:

  • The waist reading seems to change by not insignificant amounts as you move the spot across the head, even for just small perturbations about the center.
  • None of the features which require two slits seem to be working (unsure if this is software or hardware related)

I took some pictures to try and illuminate the situation - The inverted images are included to make it easier to see the flecks (?) in the slits

I am not sure how to figure out if any bit of the scan is/has been fried.


Pending further investigation, enjoy large error bars in your scan measurements!



Attachment 1: beamscanhead3.png
Attachment 2: beamscanhead6.png
  2014   Mon Sep 28 23:13:14 2009 JenneConfigurationElectronicsRob is breaking stuff....

Koji and I were looking for an extender card to aid with MZ board testing.  Rob went off on a quest to find one.  He found 2 (in addition to the one in the drawer near the electronics bench which says "15V shorted"), and put them in some empty slots in 1X1 to test them out.  Somehow, this burned a few pins on each board (1 pin on one of them, and 3 pins on the other). We now have 0 functioning extender cards: unfortunately, both extender cards now need fixing.  The 2 slots that were used in 1X1 now have yellow electrical tape covering the connectors so that they do not get used, because the ends of the burnt-off pins may still be in there. 

In other, not-Rob's-fault news, the Martian network is down...we're going to try to reset it so that we have use of the laptops again.

  2019   Tue Sep 29 16:14:44 2009 robConfigurationElectronicsRob is breaking stuff....


Koji and I were looking for an extender card to aid with MZ board testing.  Rob went off on a quest to find one.  He found 2 (in addition to the one in the drawer near the electronics bench which says "15V shorted"), and put them in some empty slots in 1X1 to test them out.  Somehow, this burned a few pins on each board (1 pin on one of them, and 3 pins on the other). We now have 0 functioning extender cards: unfortunately, both extender cards now need fixing.  The 2 slots that were used in 1X1 now have yellow electrical tape covering the connectors so that they do not get used, because the ends of the burnt-off pins may still be in there. 

In other, not-Rob's-fault news, the Martian network is down...we're going to try to reset it so that we have use of the laptops again.


This happened when I plugged the cards into a crate with computers, which apparently is a no-no.  The extender cards only go in VME crates full of in-house, LIGO-designed electronics.

  2064   Wed Oct 7 11:18:40 2009 kiwamuSummaryElectronicsracks of electronics


I took the pictures of all racks of electronics yesterday, and then uploaded these pictures on the wiki.


You can see them by clicking "pictures" in the wiki page.


  2110   Sun Oct 18 19:55:45 2009 ranaConfigurationElectronicsIP POS is back: ND filter gone, new resistors in

Its back in and re-centered. Our next move on IPPOS should be to replace its steering mirror with something bigger and more rigid.

Electronics changes:

20K -> 3.65 K  (R6, R20, R42, R31) (unused)

20K -> 3.65 K  (R7, R21, R32, R43, R11, R24, R35, R46)

If you look in the schematic (D990272), you see that its an AD797 transimpedance stage with a couple of LT1125 stages set to give some switchable gain. It looks like some of these

switches are on and some are not, but I am not sure where it would be controlled from. I've attached a snapshot of one quadrant of the schematic below.

The schematic shows the switches in the so-called 'normally closed' configuration. This is what the switches do with zero volts applied to the control inputs. As the schematic also shows,

just disconnecting the 'switch' inputs cause the switch's control inputs to go high (normally open configuration, i.e. pins 2-3 connected, pin4 open). For the record, the default positions of the IPPOS switches are:

switch1   high

switch2   low

switch3   low

switch4   high


** EDIT (Nov 2, 2009): I forgot to attach the before and after images; here they are:


  2112   Sun Oct 18 22:06:15 2009 ranaConfigurationElectronicsIP POS is back: ND filter gone, new resistors in

I tried to compare the IP_POS time series with the IPANG and MC_TRANS but was foiled at first:

1) The IPANG scan rate was set to 0.5 second, so it doesn't resolve the pendulum motions well. Fixed in the .db file.

2) Someone had used a Windows/DOS editor to edit the .db file and it was filled with "^M" characters. I have removed them all using this command:   tr -d "\r" <ETMXaux.db > new.db

3) The MC_TRANS P/Y channels were on the MC Lock screen but had never been added to the DAQ. Remember, if there's a useful readback on an EPICS screen. its not necessarily in the frames unless you add it to the C0EDCU file. I have done that now and restarted the fb daqd. Channels now exist.

4) Changed the PREC of the IPPOS channels to 3 from 2.

5) changed the sign for the IBQPD (aka IPANG) so that bigger signal is positive on the EPICS screen.

Attachment 1: Untitled.png
  2118   Mon Oct 19 14:48:15 2009 rana, robSummaryElectronicspiezo jena measuring box
Attached is the schematic of the Piezo Jena driver measuring box made in a Pomona box:
                2.2 uF
In ----o-------- | | --------o-------- Out
       |                     |
       _                     |
       _  1uF                R  7.5 kOhms
       |                     |
       |                     |
      GND                   GND
The 1 uF cap is there to simulate the piezo and the 2.2 uF and 7.5k resistor ac couple the signal for the spectrum analyzer. They give a ~10 Hz corner frequency.
Attachment 1: PA160153.JPG
Attachment 2: PA160151.JPG
  2244   Wed Nov 11 20:57:06 2009 kiwamuUpdateElectronicsMulti-resonant EOM --- LC tank circuit ---

I have been working about multi-resonant EOM since last week.

In order to characterize the behavior of the each components, I have made a simple LC tank circuit.

You can see the picture of the circuit below.


Before constructing the circuit, I made an "ideal" calculation of the transfer function without any assumptions by my hand and pen.

Most difficult part in the calculation is the dealing with a transformer analytically. Eventually I found how to deal with it in the analytical calculation.

The comparison of the calculated and measured transfer function is attached.

 It shows the resonant frequency of ~50MHz as I expected. Those are nicely matched below 50MHz !!

For the next step, I will make the model of the circuit with stray capacitors, lead inductors, ... by changing the inductance or something. 


Attachment 2: LCtank_complete.png
  2262   Fri Nov 13 03:38:47 2009 kiwamuUpdateElectronicsmulti-resonant EOM --- impedance of LC tank circuit ----

I have measured the impedance of the LC tank circuit which I referred on my last entry.

The configuration of the circuit is exactly the same as that time.

In order to observe the impedance, by using Koji's technique I injected a RF signal into the output of the resonant circuit.

In addition I left the input opened, therefore the measured impedance does not include the effect of the transformer.


- - - - - - - - - - - - results

The measured impedance is attached below; "LCtank_impedance.png"

The peak around 50MHz is the main resonance and it has impedance of ~1500 [Ohm], which should go to infinity in the ideal case (no losses).

In fact the impedance looked from the input of the circuit gets reduced by 1/n^2, where "n" is the turn ratio of the transformer.

By putting the n=4, the input impedance of the circuit should be 93 [Ohm]. This is a moderate value we can easily perform impedance-matching by some technique.

I also fitted the data with a standard model of equivalent circuit (see attachment 2).

In the figure.2 red component and red letter represents the design. All the other black stuff are parasites.

But right now I have no idea the fitted value is reasonable or not.

For the next I should check the input impedance again by the direct way; putting the signal into the input.




Attachment 1: LCtank_impedance.png
Attachment 2: LCtank_model.png
  2263   Fri Nov 13 05:03:09 2009 kiwamuUpdateElectronicsmulti-resonant EOM --- input impedance of LC tank ----

I measured the input impedance of the LC tank circuit with the transformer. The result is attached.

It looks interesting because the input impedance is almost dominated

by the primary coil of the transformer with inductance of 75nH (see attachment 1).

The impedance at the resonance is ~100 [Ohm], I think this number is quite reasonable because I expected that as 93 [Ohm]


Note that the input impedance can be derived as follower;

(input impedance) = L1 + Z/n^2.

Where L1 is the inductance of the primary coil, Z is the load in the secondary loop and n is the turn ratio.


I think now I am getting ready to enter the next phase \(^o^)/

Attachment 1: input_impedance.png
Attachment 2: input_impedance2.png
  2286   Tue Nov 17 21:10:35 2009 ranaSummaryElectronicsBusby Low Noise Box: Photos and Upgrades


It looked like the Busby Low Noise Box had too much low frequency noise and so I upgraded it. Here is a photo of the inside - I have changed out the 0.8 uF AC coupling cap with a big, white, 20 uF one I found on Rob's desk.

The Busby Box is still working well. The 9V batteries have only run down to 7.8V. The original designer also put a spare AD743 (ultra low current FET amp) and a OP27 (best for ~kOhm source impedances) in there.

Here's the noise after the fix. There's no change in the DC noise, but the AC noise is much lower than before:


I think that the AC coupled noise is higher because we are seeing the current noise of the opamp. In the DC coupled case, the impedance to ground from the input pins of the opamp is very low and so the current noise is irrelevant.

The change I implemented, puts in a corner frequency of fc = 1/2/pi/R/C = 1/2/pi/10e3/20e-6 = 0.8 Hz.

Overall, the box is pretty good. Not great in terms of current noise and so it misses getting an A+. But its easily a solid A-.

  2288   Wed Nov 18 00:38:33 2009 ranaSummaryElectronicsVoltage Noise of the SR560's OUTPUTs (the back panel)

I've measured the voltage noise of the SR560's lead acid battery outputs; they're not so bad.

Steve ordered us some replacement lead-acid batteries for our battery powered pre-amps (SR560). In the unit he replaced, I measured the noise using the following setup:

SR560                              Busby Box

(+12V/GND) -------------AC Input      Out  ----------------   SR785

The SR785 was DC coupled and auto-ranged. The input noise of the SR785 was measured via 50 Ohm term to be at least 10x less than the SR560's noise at all frequencies.


Its clear that this measurement was spoiled by the low frequency noise of the Busby box below 10 Hz. Needs a better pre-amp.

  2292   Wed Nov 18 14:55:59 2009 kiwamuUpdateElectronicsmulti-resonant EOM --- circuit design ----

The circuit design of multi-resonant EOM have proceeded.

By using numerical method, I found the some best choice of the parameters (capacitors and inductors).

In fact there are 6 parameters (Lp, L1, L2, Cp, C1, C2) in the circuit to be determined.


In general the less parameter gives the less calculation time with performing the numerical analysis. Of course it looks 6 parameters are little bit large number.

In order to reduce the arbitrary parameters, I put 4 boundary conditions.

Each boundary conditions fixed resonant peaks and valleys; first peak=11MHz, third peak=55MHz, first valley=19MHz, second valley=44MHz.


So now the remaining arbitrary parameters successfully get reduced to 2. Only we have to do is optimize the second peak as it to be 29.5MHz.

Then I take C1 and C2 as free parameters seeing how the second peak agree with 29.5MHz by changing the value of the C1 and C2.


the red color represents the good agreement with 29.5MHz, in contrast blue contour represents the bad.

 You can see some best choice along the yellow belt. Now what we should do is to examine some of that and to select one of those.

  2294   Wed Nov 18 16:58:36 2009 kiwamuUpdateElectronicsmulti-resonant EOM --- EOM characterization ---

In designing the whole circuit it is better to know the characteristic of the EOM.

I made impedance measurement with the EOM (New Focus model 4064) and I found it has capacitance of 10pF.

This is good agreement with the data sheet which says "5-10pF".

The measured plot is attached below. For comparison there also plotted "open" and "10pF mica".

In the interested band( from 1MHz to 100MHz), EOM looks just a capacitor.

But indeed it has lead inductance of 12nH, resistance of 0.74[Ohm], and parasitic capacitance of 5.5pF.

In some case we have to take account of those parasites in designing.



  2295   Wed Nov 18 22:38:17 2009 KojiUpdateElectronicsmulti-resonant EOM --- EOM characterization ---

How can I get those values from the figure?


But indeed it has lead inductance of 12nH, resistance of 0.74[Ohm], and parasitic capacitance of 5.5pF. 


  2340   Wed Nov 25 20:44:48 2009 kiwamuUpdateElectronicsMulti-resonant EOM --- Q-factor ----

Now I am studying about the behavior of the Q-factor in the resonant circuit because the Q-factor of the circuit directly determine the performance as the EOM driver.

Here I summarize the fundamental which explains why Q-factor is important.


The EOM driver circuit can be approximately described as shown in figure below


Z represents the impedance of a resonant circuit.

In an ideal case, the transformer just raise the voltage level n-times larger.  Rin is the output impedance of the signal source and usually has 50[Ohm].

The transformer also makes the impedance Z 1/n^2 smaller. Therefore this configuration gives a following relation between Vin and Vout.


 Where G is the gain for the voltage. And G goes to a maximum value when Rin=Z/n2. This relation is shown clearly in the following plot.



 Note that I put Rin=50 [Ohm] for calculating the plot.

Under the condition  Rin=Z/n2( generally referred as impedance matching ), the maximum gain can be expressed as;



It means that larger Z makes more efficient gain. In our case, interested Z is considered as the impedance at a resonance.

So what we should do is making a resonant circuit which has a higher impedance at the resonance (e.g. high Q-resonant circuit).



  2341   Thu Nov 26 02:08:34 2009 KojiUpdateElectronicsMulti-resonant EOM --- Q-factor ----

The key point of the story is:
"The recipe to exploit maximum benefit from a resonant EOM"
- Make a resonant EOM circuit. Measure the impedance Z at the resonance.
- This Z determines the optimum turn ratio n of the step-up transformer.
(n2 = Z/Rin where Rin is 50Ohm in our case.)
- This n gives the maximum gain Gmax (= n/2) that can be obtained with the step up transformer.
  And, the impedance matching is also satisfied in this condition.

OK: The larger Z, the better. The higher Q, the Z larger, thus the better.
(Although the relationship between Z and Q were not described in the original post.)

So, how can we make the Q higher? What is the recipe for the resonant circuit?
=> Choose the components with smaller loss (resistance). The details will be provided by Kiwamu soon??? 

When I was young (3 months ago), I thought...

  • Hey! Let's increase the Q of an EOM! It will increase the modulation!
  • Hey! Let's use the step-up transformer with n as high as possible! It will increase the modulation!
  • Hey! Take the impedance matching! It will increase the modulation!

I was just too thoughtless. In reality, they are closely related each other.

A high Q resonant circuit has a high residual resistance at the resonant frequency. As far as the impedance is higher than the equivalent output impedance of the driving circuit (i.e. Z>Rin n2), we get the benefit of increasing the turn ratio of the transformer. In other words, "the performance of the resonant EOM is limited by the turn ratio of the transformer." (give us more turns!)

OK. So can we increase the turn ratio infinitely? No. Once Rin n2 gets larger than Z, you no longer get the benefit of the impedance transforming. The output impedance of the signal source yields too much voltage drop.

There is an optimum point for n. That is the above recipe. 

So, a low Q resonant EOM has a destiny to be useless. But high Q EOM still needs to be optimized. As far as we use a transformer with a low turn ratio, it only shows ordinary performance.



  2403   Sat Dec 12 07:36:56 2009 ranaHowToElectronicsHow to Measure the Length of a Cable: Interferometry

Need to measure the length of the cable, but too lazy to use a measuring tape?

Then you too can become an expert cable length measurer by just using an RF signal generator and a scope:

  1. Disconnect or short (not 50 Ohm term) the far side of the cable.
  2. Put a T on the near side of the cable.
  3. Drive the input of the T with your signal source.
  4. Look at the output of the T with the scope while sweeping the signal source's frequency knob.

The T is kind of acting like a beamsplitter in an asymmetric length Michelson in this case. Just as we can use the RF phase shift between the arms to measure the Schnupp asymmetry, we can also use a T to measure the cable length. The speed of light in the cable is documented in the cable catalog, but in most cases its just 66% of the speed of light in the vacuum.

  2436   Mon Dec 21 01:14:08 2009 ranaSummaryElectronicsNoise measurement of the Rai Weiss FET preamp box

 I shorted the input to the box and then put its output into the SR560 (low noise, G = 100, AC). I put the output of the SR560 into the SR785.

*** BTW, the 2nd channel of the SR785 is kind of broken. Its too noisy by a factor of 100. Needs to go back for repair once we get started in the vac.

The attached PNG shows its input-referred noise with the short.

The picture shows the inside of the box before I did anything. The TO-5 package metal can is the meaty super dual-FET that gives this thing all of its low noise power.


In the spectra on the right are two traces. The BLUE one is the noise of the box as I found it. The BLACK one is the noise after I replaced R1, R6, R7, & R10 with metal film resistors.

The offset at the output of the box with either an open or shorted input is +265 mV.

I think we probably should also replace R2, R3, & R1, but we don't have any metal film resistors lower than 100 Ohms in the kit...but hopefully Steve will read this elog and do the right thing.

Attachment 1: IMG_0242.JPG
  2450   Thu Dec 24 01:25:29 2009 kiwamuUpdateElectronicsimpedance analyzing

The validation for high impedance measurement has been well done.

The impedance measurement is one of the keys for designing the EOM circuit.

So far I was very struggling to measure the high impedance ( above several 1000 Ohm) at RF because the EOM circuit has a high impedance at its resonance.

Finally I realized that the measured impedance was suppressed by a parasitic resistance, which especially reduces the impedance at the resonance.

Also I found that we can extract the TRUE impedance data by subtracting the effect of the parasitic resistance from resultant data.

In order to confirm whether this subtraction works correctly or not,  the impedance was directly re-measured with another analyzer for crosscheck.

                The followers are details about the re-measurement.


(measurement )

The measurement has been performed with help from Peter and Frank. ( Thank you !)

By using  network analyzer AG4395A with the impedance test kit AG43961A (these are at the PSL lab.), the impedance of resonant circuit with EOM was measured.

The picture of setup is attached. This impedance test kit allows to measure typically 0.1 [Ohm]-1M [Ohm] and frequency range of 100kHz-500MHz.


The resultant plot is attached. In the plot the blue curve represents the impedance measured by usual analyzer at 40m.

Note this curve is already subtracted the effect of the parasitic resistance.

( the parasitic resistance is in parallel to the circuit and it has ~7.8k Ohm, which is measured while the probe of the analyzer stays open. )

The red curve is the re-measured data using the impedance test kit.

The important point is that; these two peak values at the resonance around 40MHz show good agreement in 10%.

The resonant frequencies for two data differs a little bit, which might be the effect of a stray capacitance ( ~several [pF] )

The red curve has a structure around 80MHz, I think this comes from the non-coaxial cables, which connect the circuit and analyzing kit.

You can see these cables colored black and red in the picture.


( conclusion )

Our measurement with the subtraction of the  parasitic resistance effect is working reliably !

Attachment 1: DSCN0421.JPG
Attachment 2: EOM.png
  2454   Sun Dec 27 23:44:59 2009 ranaUpdateElectronicsMCT QPD investigation


I found that MCT QPD has dependence of the total output on the position of the spot. Since the QPD needs the supply and bias voltages from the sum/diff amp, I could not separate the problems of the QPD iteself and the sum/diff amplifier by the investigation on Tuesday. On Wednesday, I investigated a generic quad photodiode interface module D990692.

 This is indeed sad. But, we can perhaps bypass all of this by just using the individual segment outputs. According to the circuit diagram and the c1iool0 .db file, we should be able to just do the math on the segments and ignore the VERT/HOR/SUM signals completely. In that case, we can just use high impedance for the sum/diff buffers as Koji says and not suffer from the calibration errors at all I think.

  2455   Mon Dec 28 01:17:01 2009 KojiUpdateElectronicsMCT QPD investigation

Unfortunately, the signals for individual segments also suffer from the voltage drop as all of the low impedance amplifiers are hung from the same input.
In order to utilize the individual channels, we anyway have to remove the resistors for the VERT/HOR/SUM amps.
That is possible. But does it disable some fast channels for future ASC purposes?



 This is indeed sad. But, we can perhaps bypass all of this by just using the individual segment outputs. According to the circuit diagram and the c1iool0 .db file, we should be able to just do the math on the segments and ignore the VERT/HOR/SUM signals completely. In that case, we can just use high impedance for the sum/diff buffers as Koji says and not suffer from the calibration errors at all I think.


  2476   Tue Jan 5 09:18:38 2010 AlbertoOmnistructureElectronicsUniversal PDH Box Stored in the RF Cabinet

FYI: I stored the Universal PDH boxes in the RF cabiner in the Y arm.

  2523   Mon Jan 18 23:44:19 2010 kiwamuUpdateElectronicstriple resonant circuit for EOM

The first design of the triple resonant EOM circuit has been done.

If only EOM has a loss of 4 Ohm, the gain of the circuit is expected to be 11 at 55MHz

So far I've worked on investigation of the single resonant circuit and accumulated the knowledge about resonant circuits.

Then I started the next step, designing the triple resonant circuit.

Here I report the first design of the circuit and the expected gain.


( What I did )

At first in order to determine the parameters, such as inductors and capacitors, I have solved some equations with numerical ways (see the past entry).

In the calculation I put 6 boundary conditions as followers;

(first peak=11MHz, second peak=29.5MHz, third peak=55MHz, first valley=22MHz, second valley=33MHz, Cp=18pF)

The valley frequencies of 22MHz and 33MHz are chosen in order to eliminate the higher harmonics of 11MHz, and Cp of 18pF represents the capacitance of the EOM.

Basically the number of parameters to be determined is 6 ( L1, L2, ...,), therefore it is completely solved under 6 boundary conditions. And in this case, only one solution exists.

The point is calculation does not include losses because the loss does not change the resonant frequency.



( results )

As a result I obtained the 6 parameters for each components shown in the table below.

Cp [pF] 18.1
C1 [pF]  45.5
C2 [pF] 10.0
Lp [uH] 2.33
L1 [uH] 1.15
L2 [uH] 2.33

Then I inserted the loss into the EOM to see how the impedance looks like. The loss is 4 Ohm and inserted in series to the EOM. This number is based on the past measurement .

Let us recall that the gain of the impedance-matched circuit with a transformer is proportional to square-root of the peak impedance.

It is represented by G = sqrt(Zres/50) where Zres is the impedance at the resonance.

 As you can see in the figure, Zres = 6.4 kOhm at 55MHz, therefore the gain will be G=11 at 55MHz.

Essentially this gain is the same as that of the single resonant circuit that I've been worked with, because its performance was also limited mainly by the EOM loss.

 An interesting thing is that all three peaks are exactly on the EOM limited line (black dash line), which is represented by Zres = L/CR = 1/ (2pi f Cp)^2 R. Where R = 4 Ohm.


( next plan )

There are other solutions to create the same peaks and valleys because of the similar solution.

 It is easy to understand if you put Cp' = Cp x N, the solutions must be scaled like L1'=L1/N, C1'=C1 x N, ...,  Finally such scaling gives the same resonant frequencies.

So the next plan is to study the effect of losses in each components while changing the similar solution.

After the study of the loss I will select an optimum similar solution.

  2524   Tue Jan 19 00:10:44 2010 ranaUpdateElectronicstriple resonant circuit for EOM

Very cool.         

ELOG V3.1.3-