40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 140 of 344  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Authorup Type Category Subject
  16715   Tue Mar 8 19:29:36 2022 PacoUpdateBHDRe-balance of AS1


Installed AS1 in vacuum, near the center of the table, and installed the OSEMs. All OSEMS are "balanced" nominally, i.e. their shadow is at the halfway point optimum, but fine tuning is required, which I will attempt tomorrow after restoring the AS1 suspension screen settings. Today, I tried damping the SIDE DOF, but didn't succeed, although there was definitely some oscillating behaviour with high (> 5) gains on the damping, so I believe this is a matter of patience. For now, all OSEMs are looking ok, the SOS is in place, and hopefully it will soon be damped. 

  16716   Wed Mar 9 09:35:26 2022 PacoUpdateBHDRe-balance of AS1


AS1 is installed, OSEMs balanced, and the optic damped successfully. We should run the free swinging test overnight to validate this re-installation.

  16722   Thu Mar 10 10:05:49 2022 PacoUpdateSUSAS1 free swing test

[Paco, Ian]

  • Begin free swinging test for AS1 at 10:05 AM, set for ~ 2.04 hours.
    • Test failed because damping failed to disable.
  • Restart free swinging test for AS1 at 15:06, set for 2.04 hours.
    • Success (Attachment #1 shows the DOF input matrix diagonalization effect)

Of slight concern is the side to other degrees of freedom coupling, but this is definitely an improvement from last time.

  16725   Tue Mar 15 10:45:31 2022 PacoUpdateGeneralAssembled small in-vac optics


This morning I assembled LO3, LO4 and AS3 (all mirrors) onto polaris K1 mounts. The mounts stand as per this elog, on 4.5" posts with 0.5" Al spacers to match the beam heigth of 5.5". I also assembled ASL by adding a 0.14" Al spacer, and finally, recycled two DLC mounts (from the XEND flowbench) and posts to mount the 2 inch diameter beamsplitters BHDBS and AS2 (T=10%). I stored the previous 2" optics in the CVI and lambda optic cases and labeled appropriately.

  16731   Thu Mar 17 11:40:41 2022 PacoUpdateSUSETMY green PZT HV supply

[Anchal, Paco]

We installed a HV kepco power supply for the green PZT steering the YAUX beam. We did this in anticipation of the YARM alignment to take place this afternoon. We borrowed an unused DC power supply labeled "OMC Power spply" and made an appropriate SMA connection (Attachment #1), Then we set the Vset to 100.0 Volts and the current limit to 10 mA. Once we enabled the output we saw the 5.6 mA of current drawn by the eurocard in accordance with the wiki log (Attachment #2). 

It may not be possible to use the PZT as per this so this work may not have a direct impact on our upcoming alignment task.

We probably bumped the ethernet cable (martian network) on c1iscey, so the FE models stopped showing up on the medm screens. When we connected it back, it seemed like the FE kept running the model and only IPC showed error. We restarted the rtcds models on c1iscey and burtrestored to today morning 5:19 am.

burtwb -f /cvs/cds/rtcds/caltech/c1/burt/autoburt/today/05:19/c1scyepics.snap -l /tmp/controls_1220317_115006_0.write.log -o /tmp/controls_1220317_115006_0.nowrite.snap -v

ETMY is properly damping now and the oplev is roughly centered as well but the OPLEV Servos are off. We did not turn them on.
We should be able to carry out our cavity arm alignment today afternoon on both arms now.

  16732   Thu Mar 17 16:50:53 2022 PacoUpdateBHDXARM AUX alignment

[Ian, Paco]

We opened the ITMX chamber and

  • Inspected PR2 and LO1 and didn't see anything suspicious.
  • Took the EQ stops off ITMX in preparation for alignment


  • Ian started at the ETMX station, slightly tweaking the M1 M2 XAUX mirrors by hand and Paco on the ITMX chamber looking at the beam. The beam was visibly making it to the ITMX optic and reflecting back though at a negative pitch angle. No small motion on the M1-M2 knobs caused visible correction on this.
  • We decided to try adding an alignment offset to ITMX, and quickly saturated to 25000 (on the SUS screen) but fell short of fully correcting this PIT offset.
  • We scanned further the M1 M2 input alignment, and briefly lost the first reflection.
    • We recovered the first reflection, but the beam spot is now incident near the LL OSEM position.
  • We kept scanning M1 - M2 with Ian on the ITMX chamber this time, providing feedback through facetime.
  • Leaning on the ITMX chamber table, we noticed the magnitude of PIT correction left to be done and verified that M1-M2 two axis alignment + ITMX offsets should be enough for it.

We stopped our effort here, the XAUX beam spot is near the lower half of the ITMX face. Tomorrow, we will resume, but we will use airpods and a clean go-pro for real-time audiovisual feedback. Furthermore, ITMX OSEMs should be rebalanced as they haven't been touched after the table was balanced for PR2 and LO1.

  16735   Fri Mar 18 17:15:19 2022 PacoUpdateBHDXARM AUX alignment cont.

[Paco, Ian]

First, we re-balanced the ITMX OSEMs so that they would damp at around half-a-shadow.

Then, we set up a clean camera inside ITMX chamber looking at the ITMX optic. Then, using the live feed we aligned the AUX beam from the ETMX station using M1 and M2. The camera was great to help us align the beam properly close to the ITMX center. It wasn't very long until we could see a green beam on the IR card, but we didn't really see any flashing, so this may just be the bare transmission away from XARM resonance (Attachment #1).

Ian checked the reflection from ITMX using the IR card with holes, and he pretty much only saw one beam spot, so we turned to look for a beam scattering on the vacuum tube but didn't really see anything. This could mean that we were hitting the ETMX again, or missing slightly, or missing completely. We tried scanning the ITMX pitch and yaw using the bias (alignment) sliders, and with the illuminators off, try seeing some scattered green beam on the ETMX. We can't really see anything yet, but we will keep trying. If there are any tips on our method, it would be great to know them.

  16745   Sat Mar 26 13:04:38 2022 PacoSummaryBHDPart IIa of BHR upgrade - Green laser alignment on Yarm

I came for a bit to check on the "1Y0 burning smell" reported by Koji last evening. I agree that there's a toasty smell around the 1Y0 rack, but it is hard to tell where it comes from exactly. I think we can use the FLIR heat camera, but this will have to wait for Monday when someone with an iphone is around.

I also played a bit with the YAUX alignment (which is still poor) but I didn't try anything different nor did I seem to have more success. This is also an outstanding item for Monday, where maybe the next step is to install the GTRY path for a CCD.

  16748   Tue Mar 29 17:35:54 2022 PacoUpdateSUSDamping fix on BS, AS4, PR2, and PR3

[Ian, Paco]

  • We removed the "cheby" filters from AS4, PR2 and PR3 which had been misplaced after copying from the old SUS models. After removing them, the new SOS damped fine. Note that because of the Input matrices, the filters have to be enabled all at once for the MIMO loop to make sense.
  • We also disabled the "Cheby" filter on BS and saw it damp better. We don't understand this yet, but perhaps it's just a consequence of the many changes in the BSC that have rendered this filter obsolete.
  • we also reduced the damping gains on PR2, PR3 and AS4 to prevent overflow values. After the adjustments the optics were damping fine.
  16770   Mon Apr 11 21:13:21 2022 PacoSummaryBHDPart IIa of BHR upgrade - POY11 debugging

[Paco, Koji]

I asked Koji for some advice regarding closing the loop on YARM using POY11. A few things seemed off including

  • The YARM transmission; which was peaking at ~ 20 (typically, TRY is normalized so that under nominal input power conditions we see TRY in the range [0, 1])
  • The POY11 DCPD level was quite low; we expect a few tens of uW in this low power configuration where no more than 100 mW are going through IMC.

We looked at the POY11 RFPD first. We tried flashing an incandescent lamp in-situ and saw some weak response using an oscilloscope and the DC Out readout. We then used the OPHIR power meter and recorded ~ 1.2 uW of light incident on the POY11 RFPD... Initially, we suspected our beam was not filling the PD sensitive area (~ 2 mm diameter), but a quick estimate using the 200 mm focusing lens currently installed in the ITMY table gave us quite a generous margin of error... so we questioned the OPHIR measurement. We swapped the power meter and this time got ~ 18.4 uW, which is more in line with what we expected (phew).

Moving on, from the POY11 RFPD responsivity, and our ~ 20 uW of incident power, we expected on the order of a 20 mV of DC Output, but weren't really seeing this on the scope, so we decided to test the pins on the power of the RFPD. The DB15 cable not only supplies bipolar 15 VDC but also monitors several other test points such as Tsens, or DCout in the RFPD. We quickly noticed a weird signal on the ENAB testpoint, so we removed POY11 RFPD from the ITMY table and took it to the PD testbench. After redoing the soldering on the breakout board and RF amplifier (ZXX-500LN+), which we tested separately, we saw the expected behavior using a +- 15 VDC power supply... thus verifying that the RFPD and breakout board seemed to work ok. We turned our attention to the upstream DB15 connection, and after quickly checking the newly run cables, we ended up debugging the eurocrate PD interface. After attempting a simple power cycle and failing, we removed this card and looked at the schematic. It would seem that the logic enabling ICs (one or both) failed, thus preventing the card from enabling its outputs correctly.... We bypassed the logic by soldering pins 4,8,14 on U1, U20 and then checked the circuit in-situ, and we saw it worked fine again.

Now none of the status LEDs (which are driven by the logic IC portion) work on this card, but the card itself works fine at least for POY11.

We moved on, and installed the DB15 cables, checking the functionality at every step... Then we looked at the POY11_I_ERR signal and were happy to see nice pdh wavelets. We pushed forward a little bit more to try and lock YARM. First, we went to the Y end and centered the ETMY Oplev so as to register the position where the YARM is flashing... The ITMY Oplev is still not online. Then, we optimized the ETMY damping gains somewhat to try and make it less noisy, and finally, played with the LSC YARM loop gain to attempt locking. This last push was not as successful, but we have an idea of what next steps are needed to reduce the SUS noise, including

  • Install ITMY Oplevs, and close loop
  • Optimize ITMY damping gains

To be continued....

  16778   Thu Apr 14 10:18:35 2022 PacoSummaryBHD2 in oplev mirrors incompatible with LMR2V

[Paco, JC]

We realized the 2 in oplev mirrors (Thorlabs BB2-E02) for ITMYOL, SRMOL, and BSOL, are 0.47 in thick, while the LMR2V fixed mount is 0.46 in deep, even without taking the retaining ring into account. After a brief exchange with Koji, and Ian, we decided to glue the mirrors onto the mounts using Torr Seal (a vac compatible epoxy). They are curating in the clean room and should be ready to install in about 2 hours.

  16780   Thu Apr 14 18:34:51 2022 PacoSummaryBHDITMY 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.

  16781   Thu Apr 14 18:39:13 2022 PacoSummaryBHDPart IIa of BHR upgrade - POY11 debugging


In reply to Koji's questions;

Q1: What is the product number of the broken Kepco?

A1: Kepco JQE 0-25 V 4A (1/4 rack mountable 100 W linear power supply)

Q2: Do you feel the burning smell on this broken kepco?

A2: Not very clearly. It just smells like generic broken electronic, but the fan was already long gone by the time we detected its problem.

Q3: How much current does the +15 VDC line draw from the Sorensen?

A3: The Sorensen current monitor reads 6.3 Amps

Q4: Is there a linear power supply in the market that can handle this much current with some margin?

A4: Probably... but we would have to look around.

Q5: Do we really need a linear power supply there?

A5: Good question, I guess anything that is not contaminating the RF electronics with HF noise (e.g. switching PS) can work?

Q6: Is the same fan problem happening on other Kepcos?

A6: Other fans are on, but at least one or two have the "ill" sound... It may be worthwile to give them maintenance if we can.

  16786   Mon Apr 18 17:53:45 2022 PacoSummaryBHDPart IIa of BHR upgrade - POY11 debugging

[Paco, Ian]

We aligned the X-arm IR laser

  • First fix pointing on the ITMX by moving the BS (mostly pitch)
  • then open etmx chamber and fine tune the pointing using the BS until it is centered on ETMX
  • using beam card we quickly see the third reflection back misaligned on pitch so we move ITMX pitch to center it on ETMX
  • fine tune the ITMX alignment on ETMX and check higher order reflaction overlaping with input

at this point we checked C1:LSC-TRX_DQ using ndscope and luckly we see a tiny bit of flashing (about 0.04 in normalized high gain PD counts). So we closed ETM chamber and ITM chamber and go to control room to optimize this signal. The optimization was done in the following way:

  • First, just reiterate on the last steps from above, by maximizing the peak transmission using ITMX/ETMX pair.
  • Then, slide BS alignment, mostly in PIT, and return to ITMX/ETMX pair.
    • At some point, turning the BS PIT made a huge improvement, so I turned the control room light off and looked at the camera on the quad monitors.
  • Based on the location of the flashes (now brighter) on the ITMX/ETMX, the beam seemed to be off in PIT more than YAW, so we focused on correcting the pointing (moving BS) and then correcting with ITMX/ETMX, until the flashes got centered around ETMX.

Final peak transmission (C1:LSC-TRX_DQ) was ~ 1.3 in normalized high gain PD counts. Power budgeting tells us the peak should be ~ 2.0. The flashing on this arm is much better than YARM, so we will press on by installing POX11 RFPD and attempt locking tomorrow. This also means that YARM can be improved by a combination of alignment and/or SUS damping.

In the end we turned on the ETMX oplev and centered it to "save" our flashing position using this reference.

  16788   Tue Apr 19 18:10:10 2022 PacoUpdateBHDPart V of BHR upgrade - POX11 path, LO path, and ITMX Oplev

[Yuta, Paco]

We set up POX11 beam path from ITMX chamber to the ITMX in-air table. To do this, we first identified the POX reflection on the ITMX chamber, and then steered the POXM1 (in the BSC) by hand until we cleared the viewport. We also checked that the POX beam is centered on POXM1.

We then decided to slide the LO1 YAW to clear the LO beam path, which was otherwise clipping on the PR2 SOS. The slider (DAC limited) range of -25000 counts was barely enough to clear the SOS comfortably and avoid hitting the POXM1. The LO beam is now hitting LO2 mirror, so LO alignment can proceed from BSC and ITMY chamber.

Finally, we aligned the input ITMX Oplev beam to ITMXOL2, then ITMX, then to ITMXOL2, and finally into the ITMX in-air optical table. We took some photos of the Oplev beam (see Attachments) to note their position.

By the end of in-vacuum work there was still some flashing in the arm cavities, but fine alignment is required.

After closing the ITMX Chamber, and BSC, we moved on to center the ITMXOL beam. We accomplished this by using two mirrors instead of one as was previously the case. This relaxed the angle of incidence a little, but we had to change the path and the position of the QPD. The QPD sum reads ~ 6600 counts versus the ~ >8000 counts it read right before the vent. One attempt at closing the OL loop, and the ITMX starting oscillating in YAW (PIT was ok), so we realized that maybe we flipped the order in which the OL1 / OL2 mirror were arranged and so the YAW loop needed to flip its sign. Indeed after changing the C1:SUS-ITMX_OL_YAW_GAIN from -6.0 to 6.0 the OL_YAW loop is stable.

  16789   Wed Apr 20 08:20:22 2022 PacoUpdateBHDPart V of BHR upgrade - PR2 weirdness

Yesterday, I tried tuning the PR2 damping gains by increasing the gain until the damping gave the ~5 oscillations (by watching the damped motion using StripTool, and keeping an eye on the PD var). I noticed that often when I changed the gain, some OSEM sensors shifted (gained an offset!!) and the PD var values changed, typically increasing at higher damping gains. I reverted the changes until the PD var looked "normal" again (~ 2 mV) but it is hard to imagine that the damping filters can have such a "DC" effect, given the shape comprises single zero at 0 Hz (and pole at 30 Hz).

  16797   Thu Apr 21 16:49:01 2022 PacoUpdateBHDPart V of BHR upgrade - BS Oplev + LO1 offset

[Paco, JC, Yuta]

We aligned the BS oplev using the new BSOL mirror pair. The main change is now the AOI of the oplev on the BS is quite normal. The output beam in the in-air table was quite large (diverging?) so we had to place a short FL lens in front of the QPD.

Separately, I added the LO1 YAW offset of ~ -2500 counts (before the coil driver changes it was -24500 counts) and saw LO beam hitting LO2. This means the alignment of the LO beam can move downstream.

  16821   Sat Apr 30 13:29:33 2022 PacoUpdateBHDPOX Beam issues --- fixed, ASL alignment on vertex chamber

[Paco, Anchal, Yuta]

We opened the BSC and ITMX chamber in the morning (Friday) to investigate POX11 beam clipping. We immediately found that the POX11 beam was clipping by the recently installed cable posts, so luckily no major realingment had to be done after reinstalling the cable post in a better location.

Because we had the BSC open, we decided to steer the AS1 mirror to align the AS path from ITMY all the way to the vertex chamber.  Relatively small AS1 offsets (of ~ 2000 counts each) were added on PIT / YAW to center the beam on ASL (there is slight clipping along PIT, potentially because of the AS2 aperture. We then opened the vertex chamber and located the AS beam with relative ease. We decided to work on this chamber, since major changes propagate heavily downstream (simply changing the IMC pointing).

Anchal removed old optics from the vertex chamber and we installed the steering pair of mirrors for AS path. This changed the balance of the vertex table by a lot. By using the MC REFL camera beam spot we managed to coarsely balance the counterweights and recover the nominal IMC injection pointing. Simply reenabling the IMC autolocker gave us high transmission (~ 970 counts out of the typical 1200 these days).

The final IMC alignment was done by Anchal with delicate PIT motion on the input injection IMC miror to maximize the transmission (to our satisfaction, Anchal's motion was fine enough to keep the IMC locked). The end result was quite satisfying, as we recovered ~ 1200 counts of MC transmission.

Finally, we looked at the arm cavity transmission to see if we were lucky enough to see flashing. After not seeing it, we adjusted TT1 / TT2 to correct for any MMTT1 pitch adjustment needed after the vertex table rebalancing. Suprisingly, we didn't take too long and recovered the nominal arm cavity pointing after a little adjustment. We stopped here, but now the vertex table layout is final, and AS beam still needs to be aligned to the vertex in-air table.

  16844   Tue May 10 18:25:43 2022 PacoUpdateBHDGreen Transmission path

[Yuta, Paco]

We installed GRX_SM1, GRX_SM2, and finished aligning the GRY_SM1, and GRY_SM2 steering mirrors in the BS and IMC Chambers. GRY_SM1 was slightly misplaced (by ~ 2 inches), so we had to move it slightly. Luckily this didn't grossly misaligned the IMC, and we could recover quickly by touching MC1 & MC3 pitch, and MC1 slight yaw.

Then, Yuta installed GRX_SM1, and GRX_SM2 by repurposing two 45 AOI P-Pol GR transmission mirrors on the flowbench. Because one of the weights on the BSC was in the way of GRX_SM2, it was shifted it before installation. This probably shifted the balancing of the whole table. The GRY beam is still not lock-able to the YARM, so as a proxy for GRY transmission beam we used the slight GRX reflection from the BS, and noted slight clipping through PR3 (in transmission). This should probably be checked with GTRY.

We believe this is the last installation operation of this vent.

We made sure the WFS feedback loop is working, and realigned the arm cavities to be flashing.

  16847   Thu May 12 17:20:08 2022 PacoUpdateAlignmentPOP Beam on CCD


Got POP beam centered on camera and nominally on the two PDs. Attachment #1 shows "carrier" camera.

  16852   Fri May 13 18:42:13 2022 PacoUpdateAlignmentITMX and ITMY sat amp failures

[Yuta, Anchal, Paco]

As described briefly by JC, there were multiple failure modes going during this work segment. blush


Indeed, the 64 pin crimp cable from the gold sat amp box broke when work around ITMX chamber was ongoing. We found the right 64 pin head replacement around and moved on to fix the connector in-situ. After a first attempt, we suddenly lost all damping on vertex SUS (driven by these old sat amp electronics) because our c1susaux acromag chassis stopped working. After looking around the 1x5 rack electronics we noted that one of the +- 20 VDC Sorensens were at 11.6 VDC, drawing 6.7 A of current (nominally this supply draws over 5 Amps!) so we realized we had not connected the ITMX sat amp correctly, and the DC rail voltage drop busted the acromag power as well, tripping all the other watchdogs devil ...

We fixed this by first, unplugging the shorted cable from the rack (at which point the supply went back to 20 VDC, 4.7 A) and then carefully redoing the crimp connector. The second attempt was successful and we restored the c1susaux modbusIOC service (i.e. slow controls).


As we restored the slow controls, and damped most vertex suspensions, we noticed ITMY UL and SD osems were reading 0 counts both on the slow and fast ADCs. crying We suspected we had pulled some wires around when busy with the ITMX sat amp saga. We found that Side OSEM cLEMO cable was very loose on the whitening board. In fact, we have had no side osem signal on ITMY for some time. We fixed this. Nevertheless the UL channel remained silent... We then did the following tests:

  • Test PD mon outputs on the whitening card. We realized the whitening cards were mislabeled, with ITMX and ITMY flipped angry. We have labeled them appropriately.
  • Tested input DB15 cable with breakout board.
  • Went to the ITMY sat amp box and used the satellite box TESTER 2 on J1. It seemed correct.
  • We opened the chamber, tested the in-vacuum segments, they all were ok.
  • We flipped UR-UL OSEMs and found that the UL OSEM is healthy and works fine on UR channel.
  • We tested the in-air cable between satellite box and vacuum flange and it was ok too.
  • We suspected that the satellite box tester  is lying, so we replaced the satellite box with the spare old MC1 satellite box, and indeed that solved the issue.


Current state:

  • IMC locking normally.
  • All suspensions are damping properly.
  • Oplevs are not centered.
  • No flashing on either of the arms. We had no luck in ~20 min of attempt with just input injection changed.
  • On kicking PR3, we do see some flashing on XARM, which means XARM cavity atleast is somewhat aligned.
  • All remaining tasks before pumpdown are still remaining. We just lost the whole day.
  16861   Wed May 18 08:30:29 2022 PacoUpdateBHDSRM OpLev


The SRM Oplev injection and detection paths interfere heavily with the POY11. Due to the limited optical access, I suggest we try steering POYM1 YAW and adapting the RFPD path accordingly.

  16864   Thu May 19 08:51:40 2022 PacoUpdateBHDSRM OpLev

[Paco, Ian]

After agreement from Yuta/Anchal, I moved POYM1 yaw to clear the aforementioned path, and Ian restored the POY11 RFPD path. The demodulation phase might need to be corrected afterwards, before any lockign attempts.



The SRM Oplev injection and detection paths interfere heavily with the POY11. Due to the limited optical access, I suggest we try steering POYM1 YAW and adapting the RFPD path accordingly.


  16868   Fri May 20 20:03:48 2022 PacoUpdateBHDITMY chamber work finished - LO and AS overlapped

[Paco, Anchal, Yuta]

Today, in short we:

  • Recovered alignment of arm cavities, PRC (only ITMX aligned), and then altogether with SRM and PRM aligned to maximize all DCPD levels (AS, POP, REFL, TRX, TRY), but SRC was not flashing and the SRM yaw alignment slider was around its max value, so after recording beam positions on cameras Anchal went into the BS chamber and helped steer the SRC alignment using a combination of SRM, SR2 and AS1. After this every beam was nominally aligned except for LO and AS, which remained to be mode matched.
  • Mode matched LO3-LO4 by hand -- cheeky -- from the ITMY chamber, the final separation between these two mirrors grew by almost 3 inches with respect to the design (!!!) but the LO and AS beams came out nicely. The canonical path used for the steering was LO path, and then we overlapped the beams with the help of a gige basler camera and a couple of DCPDs (Thorlabs).
  • Yuta and Paco started running final checks in preparation for Monday (pumpdown). We aligned the IFO, but noted that using Restore/Misalign sometimes results in hysteresis.. so it is not very reliable for fine alignment modes. Then we optimized DC levels, centered all oplevs, and tweaked Green input alignment on XARM and YARM. The XARM was maximized, but in YARM we could still not get high TEM-00 flashing ...
    • Unfortunately, we discovered a slight clipping of the GTRY beam through PR3 which could mean the current alignment (pointing) is not hitting PR3 center optimally.
  • Attached are the screenshot of current aligned state after the work tonight, with oplevs centered, and the OSEM sensor values.

  16869   Mon May 23 13:16:59 2022 PacoUpdateBHDEnd of vent - checks

[Paco, Yuta]

Prep for closing and pump down.

  • Aligned IFO to maximize DC levels.
    • YARM (flashing peak 0.05 with PRM misaligned), XARM (flashing peak 0.06 with PRM misaligned), PRC (PRY flashing -30 @ POPDC, offset -70 and REFL DC 270), SRC (SRY flashing -30 @ POPDC, offset -70), BHD.
  • GTRY clipping
    • We tried moving the alignment of PR3, PR2, ETMY, ITMY to reduce clipping and retain IR flashing. We found it kind of difficult, so we only used the unclipped GTRY temporarily to improve the input YAUX injection after which the YAUX locked. We then restored the clipping in favor of the IR beam alignment.
  • PR3 position
    • PR3 seems to be +1 inch away towards East, nominally placed along North-South, and offset in YAW.
  • Aligned OPLEVs to center at around Mon May 23 13:20:32 2022
  • Snapshot of all cameras in the control room around Mon May 23 13:24:51 2022

[Chub, JC, Jordan, Yuta, Yehonathan, Paco]

Closed in the following order:

  • IMC chamber
  • OMC chamber
  • BS chamber
  • ITMY chamber
  • ITMX chamber

[Yuta, Paco]

After closing the heavy doors, we tried to have GTRY less clipped using PR2, PR3, ITMY and ETMY. During this adventure, we also aligned GRY injection beam by hand. Rotating a waveplate for GRY injection made GRY locking stably at GTRY of ~0.3.

  16874   Wed May 25 16:56:44 2022 PacoConfigurationBHDIFO recovery - IMC alignment

[Yuta, Paco]

We aligned IMC to recover the IFO progressively. First step was to center the MC REFL beamspot on the camera as well as the WFS DC. Then slide MC2 and MC3 together. Below are the alignment slider positions before/after.

  MC1 (before --> after) MC2 (before --> after) MC3 (before --> after)
PIT -0.3398 --> -0.4768 4.1217 --> 4.0737 -1.9808 --> -1.9308
YAW -0.8947 --> -0.7557 -1.2350 --> -1.3350 1.5598 --> 1.5638
  16881   Fri May 27 17:46:48 2022 PacoSummaryComputersCDS upgrade visit, downfall and rise of c1lsc models

[Paco, Anchal-remote, Yuta, JC]

Sometime around noon today, right after cds upgrade planning tour, c1lsc FE fell. We though this was ok because anyways c1sus was still up, but somehow the IFO alignment was compromised (this is in fact how we first noticed this loss). Yuta couldn't see REFL on the camera, and neither on the AP table (!!) so somehow either/all of TT1, TT2, PRM got affected by this model stopping. We even tried kicking PRM slightly to try and see if the beam was nearby with no success.

We decided to restart the models. To do this we first ssh into c1lsc, c1ioo and c1sus and stop all models. During this step, c1ioo and c1sus dropped their connection and so we had to physically restart them. We then noticed DC 0x4000 error in c1x04 (c1lsc iop) and after checking the gpstimes were different by 1 second. We then did stopped the model again, and from fb1 restart all daqd_* services and modprobe -r gpstime, modprobe gpstime, restart c1lsc and start the c1x04 model. This fixed the issue, so we finished restarting all FE models and burt restore all the relevant snap files to today 02:19 AM PDT.

This made the IFO recover its nominal alignment, minus the usual drift.

* The OAF model failed to start but we left it like so for now.

  16885   Wed Jun 1 12:56:44 2022 PacoSummaryElectronicsSTEMlab 125 handout

[Paco, Deeksha]

Yesterday I handed Deeksha a red pitaya (stemlab 125 - 10) to begin her summer work in the lab. The short term goal (~1 week) is to get it to work as a network analyzer and perhaps characterize its ADC/DAC noise spectra.

  16887   Fri Jun 3 12:13:58 2022 PacoConfigurationCDSFix RFM channels

[Paco, Yuta]

We tried fixing the issue of LSC_TRY and LSC_TRX channels not working. We first did some investigation, and just like previously reported by Chris, narrowed down the issue to the RFM channels coming from c1iscex/c1iscey.

First attempt : FAIL

In our first attempt, we

  1. Tripped ETMX/ETMY watchdogs, ssh to c1iscex/c1iscey and restart the rtcds models.
  2. Since the last step didn't fix things, we decided to do the same thing on c1lsc, c1sus, c1ioo.
  3. After hard rebooting c1ioo and c1lsc (because they died during the stopping of rtcds models), and not experiencing any timing issues (nice), we still don't fix the issue.

Second attempt: Success

A second attempt just followed Koji's previous fix explained here. Basic difference with our first attempt was a hard reboot of c1iscex/c1iscey in addition to the rtcds model restarting. RFM channels were then clear of errors and we recovered our IR transmission channels in the LSC model.

  16890   Sun Jun 5 19:46:40 2022 PacoUpdateLSCFixed IMC Trans sum issue


Fixed the issue below:


Other Issues:
 - C1:IOO-MC_TRANS_SUM is now stuck at 14009. MC auto locker doesn't work correctly. FIX ME!

by noting that the C1:IOO-MC_TRANS_SUMFILT_OUT was being held to 14009 counts for some reason. Disabling hold quickly let the IMC autolocker act back.

WFS were also turned ON, and there were a couple other control outputs being held on that loop... Strange!

  16892   Mon Jun 6 13:35:11 2022 PacoUpdateLSCFirst calibrated spectra of MICH at AS55 Q

[Paco, Yuta]

On the topic of high AS55_Q RFPD offset, it seems it stems from a small residual offset on top of the 42 dB whitening filter gain (previously 3 dB). We verified this by looking in the past using dtt and seeing an offset of ~ 100 counts, which are consistent with the hotfix. We reverted the whitening filter gain to +24 dB, in order to accomodate the 10% power difference from AS2. We decided to move forward, and try locking MICH using AS55_Q_ERR. The IQ mixing angle was changed to -167 deg from -122 deg to minimize the signal in AS55_I_ERR. We have also added comb60 filters for AS55. The LSC_MICH filter gain was adjusted to -6 (used to be -13 in the configuration script) to get a MICH_OLTF UGF of 90 Hz (which is the previously measured value as of 2021 July), see Attachment #1 for the MICH OLTF estimate.

We then calibrate MICH using the fringe amplitude, so that  4 \pi I_{0} / \lambda = 1.299 \times 10^9 {\rm cts / m}, where I_{0} is the amplitude of the error point (C1:LSC-AS55_Q_ERR_DQ) in our case ~ 110 +- 2 counts. The calibrated error point spectral density is shown in Attachment #2. Calibration is done into meters in terms of difference between BS to ITMX length and BS to ITMY length.

  16924   Thu Jun 16 18:23:15 2022 PacoConfigurationBHDRecovering LO beam in BHD DCPDs

[Paco, Yuta]

We recovered the LO beam on the BHD port. To do this, we first tried reverting to a previously "good" alignment but couldn't see LO beam hit the sensor. Then we checked the ITMY table and couldn't see LO beam either, even though the AS beam was coming out fine. The misalignment is likely due to recent changes in both injection alignment on TT1, TT2, PR2, PR3, as well as ITMX, ITMY. We remembered that LO path is quite constrained in the YAW direction, so we started a random search by steering LO1 YAW around by ~ 1000 counts in the negative direction at which point we saw the beam come out of the ITMY chamber yes

We proceeded to walk the LO1-LO2 in PIT mostly to try and offload the huge alignment offset from LO2 to LO1 but this resulted in the LO beam disappearing or become dimmer (from some clipping somewhere). This is WiP and we shall continue this alignment offload task at least tomorrow, but if we can't offload significantly we will have to move forward with this alignment. Attachment #1 shows the end result of today's alignment.

  16945   Fri Jun 24 17:16:59 2022 PacoUpdateALSXAUX cable in control room

[JC, Paco]

We took the long BNC cable that ran from ETMX to ETMY and ran it from ETMX into the control room instead. This way Cici and Deeksha can send small voltage signals to the AUX PZT and read back using the beatnote pickoff that is usually connected to the spectrum analyzer.

  16956   Tue Jun 28 16:59:35 2022 PacoSummaryALSALS beat allan deviation (XARM)


I took ~ 7 minutes of XALS beatnote data with the XAUX laser locked to the XARM cavity, and the XARM locked to PSL to develop an allan deviation estimator. The resulting timeseries for the channel C1:ALS-BEATX_FINE_PHASE_OUT_HZ_DQ (decimated timeseries in Attachment #1) was turned into an allan variance using the "overlapped variable tau estimator":

\sigma_y^2(n\tau_0, N) = \frac{1}{2n^2\tau_0^2(N - 2n)} \sum_{i=0}^{N-2n-1} (x_{i+2n} - 2x_{i+n} + x_i)^2

Where x_k represents the k-th data point in the raw timeseries, and n\tau_0 are the variable integration intervals under which two point variances are computed (the allan variance is a special case of M-point variance, where M=2). Then, the allan deviation is just the square root of that. Attachment #2 shows the fractional deviation (normalized by the mean beat frequency ~ 3 MHz for this measurement) for 100 integration times spanning the full duration (~ 7 min = 420 s).

The code used for this lives in Git/40m/labutils/measuremens/ALS/

If this estimate is any good, wherever the fractional beatnote deviation reaches a minimum value can be used as a proxy for the longest averaging time that give a statistical increase in SNR. After this timescale, the frequency comparison is usually taken over by "environmental instabilities" which I don't think I can comment further on. In our particular estimate, the 100 second integration gives a fractional deviation of ~ 0.44 %, or absolute deviation of 12.925 kHz.

  16962   Wed Jun 29 14:28:06 2022 PacoSummaryALSALS beat allan deviation (XARM)

I guess it didn't make sense since f_beat can be arbitrarily moved, but the beat is taken around the PSL freq ~ 281.73 THz. Attachment #1 shows the overlapping tau allan deviation for the exact same dataset but using the python package allantools, where this time I used the PSL freq as the base frequency. This time, I can see the minimum fractional deviation of 1.33e-13 happening at ~ 20 seconds.


what's the reasoning behind using df/f_beat instead of df/f_laser ?

Another, more familiar interpretation

The allan variance is related to the beatnote spectral density as a mean-square integral (the deviation is then like the rms) with a sinc window.

\sigma^2_\nu = 2 \int_0^{\infty} S_\nu(f) \lvert \frac{\sin({\pi f \tau})}{\pi f \tau} \lvert ^2 df

  16965   Thu Jun 30 18:06:22 2022 PacoUpdateALSOptimum ALS recovery - part I


In the morning I took some time to align the AUX beams in the XEND table. Later in the afternoon, I did the same on the YEND table. I then locked the AUX beams to the arm cavities while they were stabilized using POX/POY and turned off the PSL hepa off temporarily (this should be turned on after today's work).

After checking the the temperature slider sign on the spectrum analyzer of the control room I took some out-of-loop measurements of both ALS beatnotes (Attachment #1) by running diaggui /users/Templates/ALS/ALS_outOfLoop_Ref_DQ.xml and by comparing them against their old references (red vs magenta and blue vs cyan); it seems that YAUX is not doing too bad, but XAUX has increased residual noise around and above 100 Hz; perhaps as a result of the ongoing ALS SURF loop investigations? It does look like the OLTF UGF has dropped by half from ~ 11 kHz to ~ 5.5 kHz.

Anyways let this be a reference measurement for current locking tasks, as well as for ongoing SURF projects.

  16975   Wed Jul 6 19:58:16 2022 PacoSummaryNoiseBudgetXARM noise budget

[Anchal, Paco, Rana]

We locked the XARM using POX11 and made a noise budget for the single arm displacement; see Attachment #1. The noise budget is rough in that we use simple calibrations to get it going; for example we calibrate the measured error point C1:LSC-XARM_IN1_DQ using the single cavity pole and some dc gain to match the UGF point. The control point C1:LSC-XARM_OUT_DQ is calibrated using the actuator gain measured recently by Yuta. We also overlay an estimate of the seismic motion using C1:PEM-SEIS_BS_X_OUT_DQ (calibrated using a few poles to account for stack and pendulum), and finally the laser frequency noise as proxied by the mode cleaner C1:IOO-MC_F_DQ.

A couple of points are taken with this noise budget, apart from it needing a better calibration;

  1. Overall the inferred residual displacement noise is high, even for our single arm cavity.
    1. By looking at the sim OLTF in foton, it seemed that the single arm cavity loop TF could easily become unstable due to some near-UGF-funkiness likely from FM3 (higher freq boost), so we disabled the automatic triggering on it; the arm stayed locked and we changed the error signal (light blue vs gold (REF1) trace)
  2. The arm cavity is potentially seeing too much noise from the IMC in the 1 to 30 Hz band in the form of laser frequency noise.
    1. Need IMC noise budget to properly debug.
  3. At high frequency (>UGF), there seem to be a bunch of "wiggles" which remain unidentified.
    1. We actually tried to investigate a bit into these features, thinking they might have something to do with misalignment, but we couldn't really find significant correlation.

RXA edit:

  1. we also noticed some weirdness in the calibration of MC_F v. Arm. We think MC_F should be in units of Hz, and Paco calculated the resulting motion as seen by the arm, but there was a factor of several between these two. Need to calibrate MC_F and check. In principle, MC_F will show up directly in ALS_BEATX (with the green PDH lock off), and I assume that one is accurately calibrated. Somehow we should get MC_F, XARM, and ALS_BEAT to all agree. JC is working on calibrating the Mini-Circuits frequency counter, so once that is done we will be in good shape.
  2. we may need to turn on some MC_L feedback for the IMC, so that the MC length follows the NPRO frequency below ~20 Hz.
  3. Need to estimate where the IMC WFS noise is in all of this. Does it limit the MC length stability in any frequency band? How do we determine this?
  4. Also, we want to redo this noise budget today, whilst using AS55 instead of POX. Please measure the Schnupp asymmetry by checking the optimum demod phase in AS55 for locking Xarm v Yarm.
  16988   Mon Jul 11 19:29:23 2022 PacoSummaryGeneralFinalizing recovery -- timing issues, cds, MC1

[Yuta, Koji, Paco]

Restarting CDS

We were having some trouble restarting all the models on the FEs. The error was the famous 0x4000 DC error, which has to do with time de-synchronization between fb1 and a given FE. We tried a combination of things haphazardly, such as reloading the gpstime process using

controls@fb1:~ 0$ sudo systemctl stop daqd_*
:~ 0$ sudo modprobe -r gpstime
controls@fb1:~ 0$ sudo modprobe gpstime
controls@fb1:~ 0$ sudo systemctl start daqd_*
controls@fb1:~ 0$ sudo systemctl restart open-mx.service

without much success, even when doing this again after hard rebooting FE + IO chassis combinations around the lab. Koji prompted us to check the local times as reported by the gpstime module, and comparing it to network reported times we saw the expected offset of ~ 3.5 s. On a given FE ("c1***") and fb1 separately, we ran:

controls@c1***:~ 0$ timedatectl
  Local time: Mon 2022-07-11 16:22:39 PDT
  Universal time: Tue 2022-07-11 23:22:39 UTC
       Time zone: America/Los_Angeles (PDT, -0700)
       NTP enabled: yes
       NTP synchronized: no
 RTC in local TZ: no
       DST active: yes
 Last DST change: DST began at
                  Sun 2022-03-13 01:59:59 PST
                  Sun 2022-03-13 03:00:00 PDT
 Next DST change: DST ends (the clock jumps one hour backwards) at
                  Sun 2022-11-06 01:59:59 PDT
                  Sun 2022-11-06 01:00:00 PST
controls@fb1:~ 0$ ntpq -p
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
============================================================================== .BCST.          16 u    -   64    0    0.000    0.000   0.000

which meant a couple of things:

  1. fb1 was serving its time (broadcast to local (martian) network)
  2. fb1 was not getting its time from the internet
  3. c1*** was not synchronized even though fb1 was serving the time

By looking at previous elogs with similar issues, we tried two things;

  1. First, from the FEs, run sudo systemctl restart systemd-timesyncd to get the FE in sync; this didn't immediately solve anything.
  2. Then, from fb1, we tried pinging google.com and failed! The fb1 was not connected to the internet!!!

We tried rebooting fb1 to see if it connected, but eventually what solved this was restarting the bind9 service on chiara! Now we could ping google, and saw this output

controls@fb1:~ 0$ ntpq -p
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
+tor.viarouge.ne   2 u  244 1024  377  144.478    0.761   0.566
*ntp.exact-time. .GPS.            1 u   93 1024  377  174.450   -1.741   0.613
 time.nullrouten .STEP.          16 u    - 1024    0    0.000    0.000   0.000
+ntp.as43588.net      2 u  39m 1024  314  189.152    4.244   0.733 .BCST.          16 u    -   64    0    0.000    0.000   0.000 

meaning fb1 was getting its time served. Going back to the FEs, we still couldn't see the ntp synchronized flag up, but it just took time after a few minutes we saw the FEs in sync! This also meant that we could finally restart all FE models, which we successfully did following the script described in the wiki. Then we had to reload the modbusIOC service in all the slow machines (sometimes this required us to call sudo systemctl daemon-reload) and performed burt restore to a last Friday's snap file collection.

IMC realign and MC1 glitch?

With Koji's help PMC locked, and then Yuta and Paco manually increased the input power to the IFO by rotating the waveplate picomotor to 37.0 deg. After this, we noticed that the MC REFL spot was not hitting the camera, so maybe MC1 was misaligned. Paco checked the AP table and saw the spot horizontally misaligned on the camera, which gave us the initial YAW correction on MC1. After some IMC recovery, we saw only MC1 got spontaneously kicked along both PIT and YAW, making our alignment futile. Though not hard to recover, we wondered why this happened.

We went into the 1X4 rack and pushed MC1 suspension cables in to disregard loose connections, but as we came back into the control room we again saw it being kicked randomly! We even turned damping off for a little while and this random kicking didn't stop. There was no significant seismic motion at the time so it is still unclear of what is happening.

  16994   Tue Jul 12 19:46:54 2022 PacoSummaryALSHow (not) to take NPRO PZT transfer function

[Paco, Deeksha, rana]

Quick elog for this evening:

  • Rana disabled MC servo .
  • Slow loop also got disengaged.
  • AUX PSL beatnote is best taken with *free running lasers* since their relative frequency fluctuations are lowest than when locked to cavities.
  • DFD may be better to get PZT transfer funcs, or get higher bandwidth phase meter.
  • Multi instrument to be done with updated moku
  • Deeksha will take care of updated moku
  16997   Wed Jul 13 12:49:25 2022 PacoSummarySUSSUS frozen

[Paco, JC, Yuta]

This morning, while investigating the source of a burning smell, we turned off the c1SUS 1X4 power strip powering the sorensens. After this, we noticed the MC1 refl was not on the camera, and in general other vertex SUS were misaligned even though JC had aligned the IFO in the morning to almost optimum arm cavity flashing. After a c1susaux modbusIOC service restart and burt restore, the problem persisted.

We started to debug the sus rack chain for PRM since the oplev beam was still near its alignment so we could use it as a sensor. The first weird thing we noticed was that no matter how much we "kicked" PRM, we wouldn't see any motion on the oplev. We repeatedly kicked UL coil and looked at the coil driver inputs and outputs, and also verified the eurocard had DC power on which it did. Somehow disconnecting the acromag inputs didn't affect the medm screen values, so that made us suspicious that something was weird with these ADCs.

Because all the slow channels were in a frozen state, we tried restarting c1susaux and the acromag chassis and this fixed the issue.

  17007   Fri Jul 15 19:13:22 2022 PacoSummaryLSCFPMI with REFL/AS55 demod phase adjust

[Yuta, Paco]

  • We first zero the offsets in ASDC, AS55, REFL55, POX11, and POY11 when PSL shutter is closed.
    • After this, we checked the offsets with only ITMX aligned. Some of RFPDs had ~2 counts of offsets, which indicate some RFAM of sidebands, but we decided not to tune Marconi frequencies since the offsets were small enough.
  • We went over the demod phases for AS55, REFL55, POX11, and POY11.
    • For POX11/POY11 first we just minimized the Q in each locked XARM/YARM individually. The newfound values were
      • C1:LSC-POX11_PHASE_R = 106.991
      • C1:LSC-POY11_PHASE_R = -12.820
    • Then we misaligned the XARM by getting rid of the MICH fringe in the ASDC port with ITMX yaw offset, and locked YARM using AS55_Q and REFL55_I and found the demod phase that minimized the AS55_I and REFL55_Q. The newfound values were
      • C1:LSC-AS55_PHASE_R = -65.9586
      • C1:LSC-REFL55_PHASE_R = -78.6254
    • Repeating the above, but now misaligning YARM with ITMY yaw offset, locking XARM with AS55_Q and REFL55_I, we found the demod phases that minimized AS55_1 and REFL55_Q. The newfound values were
      • C1:LSC-AS55_PHASE_R = -61.4361
      • C1:LSC-REFL55_PHASE_R = -71.0434
  • The above demod phases difference, Schnupp asymmetry between X and Y were measured. We repeated the measurement three times to derive the error.
    • Optimal demod phase difference between X arm and Y arm for both AS55 and REFL55 were measured to be -4.5 +/- 0.1 deg, which means that lx-ly = 3.39 +/- 0.05 cm (Marconi frequency: 11.066195 MHz).
  • We measured the gain difference between AS55_Q and POX11/POY11 = -0.5
  • We measured the gain difference between REFL55_I and POX11/POY11 = -2.5

After this, we locked DARM, CARM and MICH using POX11_I, POY11_I and AS55 error signals respectively, and actuating on ETMX, MC2, and BS with NO TRIGGERS (but FM triggers were on for boosts as usual). Under this condition, FM5 is used for lock acquisition, and FM1, FM2, FM3, FM6 are turned on with FM triggers. No FM4 was on. We also noticed:

  • CARM FM6 "BounceRoll" is slightly different than "YARM" FM6 "Bounce". The absent roll resonant gain actually makes it easier to control the CARM, we just had to use YARM filter for locking it.
  • When CARM is controlled, we often just kick the ETMX to bring it near resonance, since the frequency noise drops and we otherwise have to wait long.
  17012   Mon Jul 18 16:39:07 2022 PacoSummaryLSCFPMI locking procedure using REFL55 and AS55

[Yuta, Paco]

In summary, we locked FPMI using REFL55_I, REFL55_Q, and AS55_Q. The key to success was to mix POX11_I and POY11_I in the right way to emulate CARM/DARM, and to find out the correct demodulation phase for AS55.


  1. Close PSL shutter and zero offsets in AS55, REFL55, POX11, POY11, and ASDC
    • For ASDC run python3 resetOffsets.py -c C1:LSC-ASDC_IN1, otherwise use the zer offsets on I and Q inputs from the RFPD medm screen.
  2. Lock XARM/YARM using POX/POY to tune demodulation phase.
    • Today, the demode phase in POX11 changed to 104.801, and POY11 to -11.256 deg.
  3. XARM and YARM are used in the following configuration
    • INMAT
      • 0.5 * POX11_I - 0.5 * POY --> XARM
      • 0.5 * POX + 0.5*POY --> YARM
      • REFL55_Q --> MICH (** this should be turned on after POX11/POY11)
    • LSC Filter gains
      • XARM = 0.012
      • YARM = 0.012
      • MICH = +40 (note the sign flip from last time)
    • OUTMAT
      • XARM --> 0.5 * ETMX - 0.5 * ETMY
      • YARM --> MC2
      • MICH --> BS
    • UGFs (sanity check)
      • XARM (DARM) ~ 100 Hz
      • YARM (CARM) ~ 200 Hz
      • MICH (MICH) ~ 40 Hz
  4. Run MICHOpticalGainCalibration.ipynb to see if ASDC vs REFL55_Q looks nice (ellipse in the XY plot), and find any residual offset in REFL55_Q.
    • If the plot doesn't look nice in this regard, the IFO needs to be aligned.
  5. Sensing matrix for CARM/DARM and MICH.
    • With the DARM, CARM and MICH lines on, verify the demod error signals look ok both in mag and phase.
    • For example, we found that CARM error signals were correctly represented by either 0.5 * POX11_I + 0.5 * POY11_I or 0.5 * REFL55_I.
    • Similarly, we found that DARM error signal was correctly represented by either 0.5 * POX11_I - 0.5 * POY11_I or 2.5 * AS55_Q.
    • To find this, we minimized CARM content in AS55_Q, as well as CARM content in REFL55_Q.
  6. We acquired the lock by re-configuring the error point as below:
    • INMAT
      • 0.5*REFL55_I --> YARM (CARM)
      • 2.5 * AS55_Q --> XARM (DARM)
    • During the hand-off trials, we repeatedly ran the sensing matrix and UGF measurements while stopping at various intermediate mixed error points to check how the error signal calibrations changed if at all.
      • Attachment #1 shows the DARM OLTF using POX/POY (blue), only with CARM handoff (green), and after DARM handoff (red)
      • Attachment #2 shows the CARM OLTF using POX/POY (blue), only with CARM handoff (green), and after DARM handoff (red)
      • Attachment #3 shows the MICH OLTF using POX/POY (blue), only with CARM handoff (green), and after DARM handoff (red)
    • The sensing matrix after handoff is below:
Sensing Matrix with the following demodulation phases
{'AS55': 192.8, 'REFL55': 95.63177865911078, 'POX11': 104.80089727128349, 'POY11': -11.256509422276006}
Sensors          	           DARM     	           CARM     	            MICH     	
C1:LSC-AS55_I_ERR_DQ	5.09e-02 (89.6761 deg)	2.03e-01 (-114.513 deg)	1.28e-04 (-28.9254 deg)	
C1:LSC-AS55_Q_ERR_DQ	4.78e-02 (88.7876 deg)	3.61e-03 (-68.7198 deg)	8.34e-05 (-39.193 deg)	
C1:LSC-REFL55_I_ERR_DQ	5.18e-02 (-92.2555 deg)	1.20e+00 (65.2507 deg)	1.15e-04 (-102.027 deg)	
C1:LSC-REFL55_Q_ERR_DQ	1.81e-04 (59.0854 deg)	1.09e-02 (-114.716 deg)	1.77e-05 (-23.6485 deg)	
C1:LSC-POX11_I_ERR_DQ	8.51e-02 (91.2844 deg)	4.77e-01 (67.1709 deg)	7.97e-05 (-72.5252 deg)	
C1:LSC-POX11_Q_ERR_DQ	2.63e-04 (114.584 deg)	1.32e-03 (-113.505 deg)	2.10e-06 (118.146 deg)	
C1:LSC-POY11_I_ERR_DQ	1.58e-01 (-88.9295 deg)	6.16e-01 (67.6098 deg)	8.71e-05 (172.73 deg)	
C1:LSC-POY11_Q_ERR_DQ	2.89e-04 (-89.1114 deg)	1.09e-03 (70.2784 deg)	3.77e-07 (110.206 deg)	

Lock gpstimes:

  1. [1342220242, 1342220260]
  2. [1342220420, 1342220890]
  3. [1342221426, 1342221574]
  4. [1342222753, 1342223230]

Sensitivity estimate (NANB)

Using diaggui, we look at the AS55_Q error point and the DARM control point (C1:LSC-XARM_OUT). We roughly calibrate the error point using the sensing matrix element and actuation gain at the DARM oscillator freq 4.78e-2 / (10.91e-9 / 307.880^2). The control point is calibrated with a 0.95 Hz SUS pole. Attachment #4 shows the sensitivity estimate.

  17021   Wed Jul 20 11:58:45 2022 PacoSummaryGeneralJenne laser kaput?

[Paco, Yehonathan, JC]

We were trying to setup the Jenne laser to characterize the response of three 1811s that Yehonathan is using for his WOPA experiment (in QIL). We hooked up a ~ 5 VDC power supply to the bias tee and looked to see if there was any DC response in the REF PD. We used a DB9 breakout board and a DB9 cable, and saw some current being drawn. The DC current was a bit too high (500 mA), so we turned the DC voltage off, and realized the VDC power was reversed, probably along the DB9 cable which we didn't check before. As we flipped the power supply leads and turned power back on, we could no longer see any current even though the voltage was now right (or was it???). We would like to debug this laser, and continue using it if it still works (!), but there is negligible documentation either here or in the wiki, so if there are any known places to look at it would be helpful to know them.

  17022   Wed Jul 20 14:12:07 2022 PacoSummaryGeneralJenne laser kaput!

[Koji, Yehonathan, Paco]

Koji pointed out that this laser was always driven with a current driver (which was not nearby), and after finding it on one of the rolling carts, we hooked up the system but found that the laser driver displayed open circuit near the usual 20mA operating point. We therefore have to conclude that this laser is no more. We will look for a reasonable replacement.


[Paco, Yehonathan, JC]

We were trying to setup the Jenne laser to characterize the response of three 1811s that Yehonathan is using for his WOPA experiment (in QIL). We hooked up a ~ 5 VDC power supply to the bias tee and looked to see if there was any DC response in the REF PD. We used a DB9 breakout board and a DB9 cable, and saw some current being drawn. The DC current was a bit too high (500 mA), so we turned the DC voltage off, and realized the VDC power was reversed, probably along the DB9 cable which we didn't check before. As we flipped the power supply leads and turned power back on, we could no longer see any current even though the voltage was now right (or was it???). We would like to debug this laser, and continue using it if it still works (!), but there is negligible documentation either here or in the wiki, so if there are any known places to look at it would be helpful to know them.


  17024   Wed Jul 20 18:07:52 2022 PacoUpdateBHDBHD MICH test

[Paco, Yuta, JC]

We did some easy tests on the BHD readout in preparation for BHD MICH. With the arm cavities and LO beam misaligned, but the MICH aligned, we measured the transfer function from C1:LSC-DCPD_A_OUT to C1:LSC-DCPD_B_OUT to get a rough estimate of the gain balance: 1.8 * DCPD_A = DCPD_B. We then locked MICH using REFL55_Q and looked at

  • 1.8 * A - B (which we encoded using C1:LSC-PRCL_A_IN1)
  • 1.8 * A + B (which we encoded using C1:LSC-PRCL_B_IN1)

namely the DCPD BHD signals. After turning the MICH_OSC on (2000 gain @ 311.1 Hz), we took some power spectra under the following three configurations:

  1. LO misaligned, no MICH offset.
  2. LO overlap, no MICH offset.
  3. LO overlap and MICH offset.

For 1. the expectation was that since LO is misaligned and the AS port is dark, we would get no signal. In 2., however both A and B would might see some incoherent signal, but still no MICH. Finally in 3. all signals should be able to see MICH, including A-B. Attachment #1 shows the measurements 1, 2, and 3 (offset = -5.0). Then, with increasing offset values, the BHD MICH signals increased as well; discussion to follow.

  17030   Mon Jul 25 09:05:50 2022 PacoSummaryGeneralTesting 950nm laser found in trash pile

[Paco, Yehonathan]

==== Late elog from Friday ====

Koji provided us with a QFLD-950-3S (QPHOTONICS) salvaged from Aidan's junk pile (LD is alive according to him). We tested the Jenne laser setup with this just to decide if we should order another one, and it worked.

The laser driver anode and cathode pins (8/9, 4/5 respectively) on the rear DB9 port from the  ILX Lightwave LDX-3412 driver were connected to the corresponding anode and cathode pins in the laser package (5, and 9; note the numbers are reversed between driver and laser). Then, interlock pins 1 and 2 in the driver were shorted to enable operation. This is all illustrated in Attachments #1-2.

After setting a limit of 27.6 mA current in the driver, we slowly increased the actual current to ~ 19 mA until we could see light on a beam card. We can go ahead and get a 1060 nm replacement.

  17037   Tue Jul 26 20:54:08 2022 PacoUpdateBHDBHD MICH test - LO phase control

[Yuta, Paco]

TL;DR Successfully controlled LO phase, and did BHD-MICH readout with various MICH offsets and LO phases.

Today we implemented a DCPD based LO phase control. First, we remeasured the balancing gain at 311.1 Hz (the MICH oscillator freq) and combined C1:HPC-DCPD_A_OUT with C1:HPC-DCPD_B_OUT to produce the balanced homodyne error signal (A-B). We feed this error signal to C1:HPC-LO_PHASE_IN1 and for the main loop filters we simply recycled the LSC-MICH loop filters FM2 through FM5 (we also copied FM8, but didn't end up using it much). Then, we verified the LO phase can be controlled by actuating either on LO1 or LO2. For LO2, we added an oscillator in the HPC LOCKINS at 318.75 Hz (we kept this on at 1000 counts for the measurements below).

The LO phase control was achieved with a loop gain in the range of 10-30 (we used 20), no offset, and FM4, and FM5 engaged. FM2 can be added to boost, but we usually skipped FM3. Then, we went through a set of measurements similar to the ones described in a previous elog. A key difference with respect to the measurements from before is that we locked MICH using AS55Q (as opposed to REFL55Q). This allowed us to reach higher MICH offsets without losing lock. After turning on the MICH oscillator at 3000 counts, we looked at:

  1. LO misaligned + MICH at dark fringe (offset = -21).
    • Here, we don't expect to see any MICH signal and indeed we don't, except for a small residual peak from perhaps a MICH offset or slightly imbalanced PDs.
  2. LO aligned, but uncontrolled + MICH at dark fringe (offset = -21).
    • Here we would naively expect MICH to show up in A-B, but because of the uncontrolled LO phase, we mostly see the noise baseline (mostly from LO RIN? ...see measurement 3) under which this signal is probably buried. Indeed, the LO fringe increased noise in A, B, and A-B but not in A+B. This is nice. yes
  3. LO aligned, but uncontrolled + MICH with dc readout (offset = +50).
    • Here we expected the MICH signal to show up due to the large offset, and we can indeed see it in A, B, and A+B, but not in A-B. Nevertheless we see almost exactly the same noise level even though we allow some AS light into the BHD readout, so maybe the noise observed in the A-B channel from measurements 2 and 3 is mostly from LO RIN. This needs further investigation...
  4. LO aligned, controlled at no offset + MICH with dc readout (offset = +50).
    • In general here we expected to see a noise reduction in the A-B channel since the LO fringe is stable, and a MICH signal should appear. Furthermore, since LO phase is under control, we expect the LO2 Oscillator to appear which it does for this and the following measurements. Because of the relative freedom, we tried this measurement in two cases:
      1. When feeding back to LO1
        • We actually see MICH in the A-B channel, as expected, after the noise level dropped by ~ 5. We also observed small sidebands +- 1 Hz away from the MICH peak, probably due to local damping in either LO or AS paths.
      2. When feeding back to LO2
        • We also see MICH here, with a slightly better drop in noise (relative to feeding back to LO1). Sidebands persisted here, but around at +- 2 Hz.
  5. LO aligned, controlled (offset = 10) + MICH with dc readout (offset = +50). *
    • Here, we expected the A-B MICH content to increase dramatically, and indeed it does after a little tuning of the LO phase heart. The noise level decreased slightly because LO phase noise is decreased around the optimal point.
  6. LO aligned, controlled (offset = 20) + MICH with dc readout (offset = +30). *
    • Here, we naively expected A+B MICH content to decrease, but A-B remain constant. In order to see this we tried to keep the balance between the offsets, but this was hard. We don't really see much of this effect, so this also needs further investigation. As long as we keep controlling the LO phase using the DCPDs because the offsets tend to reduce the error signal we will have a harder time.

* For these measurements we actuated on LO2 to keep the LO phase under control.

Note that the color code above corresponds to the traces shown in Attachment #1.

What's next?

  • Alignment of LO and AS might be far from optimized, so it should be tried more seriously.
  • What's the actual LO power? How does it compare with AS power at whatever MICH offsets?
  • Try audio dither LO phase control.
    • With MICH offset.
    • Without MICH offset, double demod (after dolphin fix crying)
  17102   Wed Aug 24 12:02:24 2022 PacoUpdateSUSITMX SUS is sus UL glitches?

[Yehonathan, Paco]

This morning, while attempting to align the IFO to continue with noise-budgeting, we noted the XARM lock was not stable and showed glitches in the C1:LSC-TRX_OUT (arm cavity transmission). Inspecting the SUS screens, we found the ULSEN rms ~ 6 times higher than the other coils so we opened an ndscope with the four face OSEM signals and overlay the XARM transmission. We immediately noticed the ULSEN input is noisy, jumping around randomly and where bigger glitches correlated with the arm cavity transmission glitches. This is appreciated in Attachment #1.

Signal chain investigation

We'll do a full signal investigation on ITMX SUS electronics to try and narrow down the issue, but it seems the glitches come and go... Is this from the gold satamp box? ...

  17104   Thu Aug 25 15:24:06 2022 PacoHowToElectronicsRFSoC 2x2 board -- fandango

[Paco, Chris Stoughton, Leo -- remote]

This morning Chris came over to the 40m lab to help us get the RFSoC board going. After checking out our setup, we decided to do a very basic series of checks to see if we can at least get the ADCs to run coherently (independent of the DACs). For this I borrowed the Marconi 2023B from inside the lab and set its output to 1.137 GHz, 0 dBm. Then, I plugged it into the ADC1 and just ran the usual spectrum analyzer notebook on the rfsoc jupyter lab server. Attachment #1 - 2 shows the screen captured PSDs for ADCs 0 and 1 respectively with the 1137 MHz peaks alright.

The fast ADCs are indeed reading our input signals.

Before this simple test, we actually reached out to Leo over at Fermilab for some remote assistance on building up our minimally working firmware. For this, Chris started a new vivado project on his laptop, and realized the rfsoc 2x2 board files are not included in it by default. In order to add them, we had to go into Tools, Settings and add the 2020.1 Vivado Xilinx shop board repository path to the rfsoc2x2 v1.1 files. After a little bit of struggling, uninstalling, reinstalling them, and restarting Vivado, we managed to get into the actual overlay design. In there, with Leo's assistance, we dropped the Zynq MPSoC core (this includes the main interface drivers for the rfsoc 2x2 board). We then dropped an rf converter IP block, which we customized to use the right PLL settings. The settings, from the System Clocking tab were changed to have a 409.6 MHz Reference Clock (default was 122.88 MHz). This was not straightforward, as the default sampling rate of 2.00 GSPS was not integer-related so we had to also update that to 4.096 GSPS. Then, we saw that the max available Clock Out option was 256 MHz (we need to be >= 409.6 MHz), so Leo suggested we dropped a Clocking Wizard block to provide a 512 MHz clock input for the rfdc. The final settings are captured in Attachment # 3. The Clocking Wizard was added, and configured on its Output Clocks tab to provide a Requested Output Freq of 512 MHz. The finall settings of the Clocking wizard are captured in Attachment #4. Finally, we connected the blocks as shown in Attachment #5.

We will continue with this design tomorrow.

  17133   Tue Sep 6 17:39:40 2022 PacoUpdateSUSLO1 LO2 AS1 AS4 damping loop step responses

I tuned the local damping gains for LO1, LO2, AS1, and AS4 by looking at step responses in the DOF basis (i.e. POS, PIT, YAW, and SIDE). The procedure was:

  1. Grab an ndscope with the error point signals in the DOF basis, e.g. C1:SUS-LO1_SUSPOS_IN1_DQ
  2. Apply an offset to the relevant DOF using the alignment slider offset (or coil offset for the SIDE DOF) while being careful not to trip the watchdog. The nominal offsets found for this tuning are summarized below:
Alignment/Coil Step sizes
LO1 800 300 300 10000
LO2 800 300 400 -10000
AS1 800 500 500 20000
AS4 800 400 400 -10000
  1. Tune the damping gains until the DOF shows a residual Q with ~ 5 or more oscillations.
  2. The new damping gains are below for all optics and their DOFs, and Attachments #1-4 summarize the tuned step responses as well as the other DOFs (cross-coupled).
Local damping gains
LO1 10.000 5.000 3.000 40.000
LO2 10.000 3.000 3.000 50.000
AS1 14.000 2.500 3.000 85.000
AS4 15.000 3.100 3.000 41.000

Note that during this test, FM5 has been populated for all these optics with a BounceRoll (notches at 16.6, 23.7 Hz) filter, apart from the Cheby (HF rolloff) and the 0.0:30 filters.

ELOG V3.1.3-