40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
 40m Log, Page 170 of 344 Not logged in
ID Date Author Type Category Subject
749   Mon Jul 28 17:44:07 2008 ranaUpdatePSLPMC PZT v. temperature
This plot shows that the PMC PZT has ~20 Vpp fluctuations on a 24 hour timescale
which is correlated to the 24 hour temperature fluctuations. By contrast, the MZ
has ~75 Vpp
.
Attachment 1: Untitled.pdf
15138   Wed Jan 22 11:00:21 2020 gautamUpdatePSLPMC REFL ghost beam

I looked into this a little more today.

1. The steering optic used to route PMC REFL to the RFPD is in fact a window (labelled W1-PW-1025-UV-1064-45P), not a High-T beamsplitter.
2. With the PMC unlocked, I measured ~10.70 mW in the stronger of the two beams, 5.39 mW in the weaker one.
• The window spec is Tp > 97%. Since we have ~1.3 W incident on the PMC, the primary reflection corresponds to T=99.2%, which is consistent with the spec.
• There is no spec given for the coating on the back side of this window. But from the measured values, it seems to be R = 100* 5.39e-3 / (1.3*T^2) ~ 0.4%. Seems reasonable.

Currently, the iris is set up such that the stronger beam makes it to the PMC RFPD, while the weaker one is blocked by the iris. As usual, this isn't a new issue - was noted last in 2014, but who knows whether the new window was intalled...

 Quote: Today I noticed that the beam reflected from the PMC into the RFPD has a ghost (attachment) due to reflection from the back of the high transmission beam splitter that stirs the beam into the RFPD.
15147   Thu Jan 23 18:52:31 2020 gautamUpdatePSLPMC RFPD characterization

Summary:

The RF transimpedance of the PMC PDH RFPD was measured, and found to be 1.03 kV/A

Details:

With the new fiber coupled PDFR system, it was very easy to measure the response of this PD in-situ 🎉 . The usual transfer function measurement scheme was used, with the AG4395 RF out modulating the pump current of the diode laser, and the measured transfer function being the ratio of the response of the test PD to the reference PD.

I assume that the amount of light incident on the reference NF1611 photodiode and the test photodiode were equal - I don't know what the DC transimpedance of the PMC REFL photodiode is (can't find a schematic), but the DC voltage at the DC monitor point was 16.4 mV (c.f. -2.04 V for the NF1611). The assumption shouldn't be too crazy because assuming the reference PD has an RF transimpedance of 700 V/A (flat in the frequency range scanned), we get a reasonable shape for the PMC REFL photodiode's transimpedance.

The fitted parameters are overlaid in Attachment #1. The 2f notch is slightly mistuned it would appear, the ratio of transimpedance at f1/2*f1 is only ~10. The source files have been uploaded to the wiki.

Knowing this, the measured PDH discriminant of 0.064 GV/m is quite reasonable:

• expected optical gain from modulation depth assuming a critically coupled cavity is 0.089 GW/m.
• Assume 0.7 A/W responsivity for InGaAs.
• Account for the fact that only 0.8 % of the reflected light reaches the PMC photodiode because of the pickoff window.
• Account for a conversion loss of 4.5 dB in the mixer.
• Account for the voltage division by a factor of 2 at the output of the BLP-1.9 filter due to the parallel 50 ohm termination.
• Then, the expected PDH discriminant is 0.089e9 W/m * 0.7 A/W * 0.8e-2 * 1.03kV/A * 10^(-4.5/20) * 0.5 ~ 0.15 GV/m. This is now within a factor of ~2 of the measured value, and I assume the total errors in all the above assumed parameters (plus the cable transmission loss from the photodiode to the 1X1 rack) can easily add up to this.

So why is this value so different from what Koji measured in 2015? Because the monitor point is different. I am monitoring the discriminant immediately after the mixer, whereas Koji was using the front panel monitor. The latter already amplifies the signal by a factor of x101 (see U2 in schematic).

Conclusion:

I still haven't found anything that is obviously wrong in this system (apart from the slight nonlinearity in the VGA stage gain steps), which would explain why the PMC servo gain has to be lower now than 2018 in order to realize the same loop UGF.

 So the next step is to characterize the RF transimpedance of the PMC RFPD.
Attachment 1: PDresp.pdf
7337   Tue Sep 4 13:50:26 2012 ericqUpdatePSLPMC Realigned, power adjusted

I adjusted the PMC alignment this morning, brought the transmission up to 0.83V.

After the lunch meeting, we found the the MC transmission was higher than recently seen. Turned out the HWP had drifted, causing 30mW to be input to the MC. I adjusted it back down to 20mW.

3951   Thu Nov 18 23:45:18 2010 ranaConfigurationPSLPMC Refl Cam

Valera and Haixing and I installed a PMC REFL camera today. We stole the camera control box from the MC2 trans area (because I don't know why we need a camera there).

We installed it such that it is looking at the leak through of the last turning mirror before the PMC REFL RFPD. This beam was previously going into a Thorlabs razor blade dump.

There is no steering mirror to align into this camera; we just positioned the camera such that the REFL beam fills up the monitor. WE cable tied the cable to the table and the

output of the camera control box is piped into the control room correctly as PMCR. The "IMCR" quadrant is actually the PMCT beam. JoonHo is going to fix this promptly.

Also, I noticed how beautiful  the MC2 Simulink diagram is so I post it here for your viewing pleasure. We should take this as a reference and not produce any new diagrams which are less useful or beautiful or easy to understand.

772   Wed Jul 30 16:35:56 2008 EricUpdatePSLPMC Scan Graphs
Graphs of the PMC scan data that I got earlier today.

PMCLongScanWide.tiff shows the transmission intensity and PZT voltage plotted against time for a longer scan of the PMC (~120 seconds for one sweep).

PMCLongScanPeak.tiff is the same scan zoomed in on the primary peak. This scan was done with the laser power at around 1/3 its original value. However, scans done at around 1/6 the original value have peaks that are just as messy.

PMCShortScanWide.tiff shows the intensity and voltage for a more rapid scan (~30 second for one sweep). The black lines show how the peak positions are at very different PZT voltages (a difference of ~10 volts in both cases).

PMCShortScanPeak.tiff is zoomed in on the primary peak. The peak is much cleaner than for the long scan (less time for the laser's heat to expand the mirror?), though it is likely still too messy to reliably fit to a lorentzian.
Attachment 1: PMCLongScanPeak.tiff
Attachment 2: PMCLongScanWide.tiff
Attachment 3: PMCShortScanPeak.tiff
Attachment 4: PMCShortScanWide.tiff
775   Thu Jul 31 10:27:17 2008 ranaUpdatePSLPMC Scan Graphs

 Quote: Graphs of the PMC scan data that I got earlier today.

On the UNIX computers, one can use 'convert' to change these to PNG. A DC offset should be added to the transmitted
light so that the scan can be plotted with a log y-scale. And, of course, Acrobat can be used to make it into a
single PDF file.

The PMC scan always has this distortion and so the input power has to be decreased to a few mW to reduce the
thermal expansion effect; the expansion coefficient for SiO2 is ~5 x 10^-7 / K and we're worried about nm level
expansions.
892   Wed Aug 27 13:55:43 2008 rana,jenneUpdatePSLPMC Servo Board
Board is back in. PMC is locked.

Nominal gain is now 15 dB with brick. We need to do more studies:

• Find out why there is still 35 MHz signal at the error point. Order some low pass filters to cut off above 35 MHz.
• Explore brick + no-brick loop shapes and error spectra.
• Measure and set the OLG.

We've left the copper-wrapped lead brick installed to let it slowly conform to the glass better.
895   Fri Aug 29 02:40:43 2008 rana,jenneUpdatePSLPMC Servo Board

 Quote: Board is back in. PMC is locked.

This entry has details about the low pass filter after the PMC mixer. This filter has a few purposes:

1] Remove the beat signal (at 2*f_mod) between the PD RF signal at f_mod and the LO signal at f_mod.
2] Remove the beat signal (at f_mod) between the PD RF signal at 2*f_mod (which comes from the
beating of the upper and lower RF sidebands) and the LO signal at f_mod.
3] Remove other RF signals from non-ideal behavior of the LO drive signal and distortion in the RF PD pre-amp.

So its important to have a very good rejection at 35 MHz and higher. I used the Hartmut LC network design which is
installed on H1, H2, & L1. Since there is a high gain in the audio amps right after the mixer we have to get rid of
the RF or else we'll get slew rate limited or otherwise rectified downconversion of the RF signal into our audio band.

Of course, what everyone immediately realizes from the above 3 points, is that this filter can't protect the PMC
noise performance from homodyne mixing (e.g. 2*f_mod in the LO and 2*f_mod in the RF PD). To get around that, we're
ordering some filters from Mini-Circuits to remove the 2f from those signals by ~30 dB. As long as we install
the same filters on the RF and LO legs, there should be no significant phase shift in the demodulated signal.

The attached 2 page PDF shows the calculated before and after TFs of this filter. The 2 attached .m files
calculate the TF's and have ascii art which shows how the filter works.

Here's a comparison of the attenuation (in dB) of 2 candidate Mini-circuits filters:

 f(MHz) SLP-30 SLP-50 31 0.5 0.4 35 1.3 0.4 38 6.1 0.4 40 10.8 0.42 61 46.3 14.8 71 60 29 91 76.9 48 107 80 60

We don't have tabulated data at the same frequencies for both filters so I just made up some of the points by eye-balling the
plots from the catalog - but you get the idea: we can get away with using the SLP-30 at 35 MHz since it only attenuates the
signals by ~1.5 dB. So if someone can find 4 of these then Steve doesn't have to order any from Mini-Circuits.
Attachment 1: pmclp-07.pdf
Attachment 2: pmclp_40m_080824.m
% PMCLP is a TF of the IF filter after the PMC mixer
%

% Mixer_Voltage -- Rs -- L1 --- L2 ---------Vout
%                            |      |   |
%                           C1     C2   Rl
%                            |      |   |
%                           GND    GND  GND
%


... 58 more lines ...
Attachment 3: pmclp.m
% PMCLP is a TF of the IF filter after the PMC mixer
%

% Mixer_Voltage -- Rs -- L1 --- L2 ---------Vout
%                            |      |   |
%                           C1     C2   Rl
%                            |      |   |
%                           GND    GND  GND
%


... 57 more lines ...
884   Tue Aug 26 09:04:59 2008 ranaConfigurationPSLPMC Servo Board: Out for Repairs
I've started modifying our PMC board to bring it up to the 21st century - leave the screen alone or else you might zap something.
11782   Wed Nov 18 17:09:22 2015 KojiSummaryPSLPMC Servo analysis

Summary

The PMC servo was analysed. OLTF was measured and modeled by ZPK (Attachment 1). The error and actuator signals were calibrated in m/rtHz (Attachment 2)

Measurement methods

OLTF:

- The PMC servo board does not have dedicated summing/monitor points for the OLTF measurement. Moreover the PZT HV output voltage is monitored with 1/49.6 attenuation.
Therefore we need a bit of consideration.

- The noise injection can be done at EXT DC.
- Quantity (A): Transfer function between HV OUT MON and MIX OUT MON with the injection.
We can measure the transfer function between the HV OUT (virtual) and the MIX OUT. (HV OUT->MIX OUT). In reality, HV OUT is attenuated by factor of 49.6.
i.e. A = (HV_OUT->MIX_OUT)*49.6
- Quantity (B): Transfer function between HV OUT MON and MIX OUT MON without the injection.

This is related to the transfer function between the MIX OUT and HV OUT. In reality, HV OUT is attenuated.
i.e. B = 1/((MIX_OUT->HV_OUT)/49.6)

- What we want to know is HV_OUT->MIX_OUT->HV_OUT. i.e. A/B = (HV_OUT->MIX_OUT*49.6)*((MIX_OUT->HV_OUT)/49.6) = HV_OUT->MIX_OUT->HV_OUT

PSD:

- The MIX OUT and HV OUT spectra have been measured. The MIX OUT was calibrated with the calibration factor in the previous entry. This is the inloop stability estimation.
From the calibrated MIX OUT and HV OUT, the free running stability of the cavity was estimated, by mutiplying with |1-OLTF| and |1-1/(1-OLTF)|, respectively, in order to recover
the free running motion.

OLTF Modeling

Here is the model function for the open loop TF. The first line comes from the circuit diagram. The overall factor was determined by eye-fit.
The second and third lines are to reproduce the peak/notch feature at 12kHz. The fourth line is to reproduce 28kHz feature.
The LPF right after the mixer was analyzed by a circuit simulation (Circuit Lab). It can be approximated as 150kHz LPF as the second pole
seems to come at 1.5MHz.

The sixth line comes from the LPF formed by the output resistance and the PZT capacitance.

The seventh line is to reproduce the limit by the GBW product of OP27. As the gain is 101 in one of the stages,
it yields the pole freq of ~80kHz. But it is not enough to explain the phase delay at low frequency. Therefore this
discrepancy was compensated by empirical LPF at 30kHz.

function cmpOLTFc = PMC_OLTF_model(freqOLTFc)

cmpOLTFc = -7e5*pole1(freqOLTFc,0.162).*zero1(freqOLTFc,491)... % from the circuit diagram     .*zero2(freqOLTFc,12.5e3,100)... % eye-fit     .*pole2(freqOLTFc,12.2e3,6)... % eye-fit     .*pole2(freqOLTFc,27.8e3, 12)... % eye-fit     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,150e3)... % Mixer LPF estimated from Circuit Lab Simulation     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,11.3)... % Output Impedance + PZT LPF     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,8e6/101)... % GBW OP27     .*pole1(freqOLTFc,3e4); % Unknown

end

Result

Attachment 1:

The nominal OLTF (Nov 17 data) shows the nominal UGF is ~1.7kHz and the phase margin of ~60deg.

The measured OLTF was compared with the modelled OLTF. In the end they show very sufficient agreement for further calibration.
The servo is about to be instable at 28kHz due to unknown series resonance. Later in the same day, the gain of the PMC loop had to be
reduced from 7dB to 3dB to mitigate servo oscillation. It is likely that this peak caused the oscillation. The notch frequency was measured
next day and it showed no sign of frequncy drift. That's good.

We still have some phase to reduce the high freq peaks by an LPF in order to increase the over all gain.

Attachment 2:

The red curve shows the residual floor displacement of 2~10x10-15 m/rtHz. Below 4Hz there is a big peak. I suspect that I forgot to close
the PSL shutter and the IMC was locked during the measurement. Then does this mean the measured noise corresponds to the residual laser
freq noise or the PMC cavity displacement? This is interesting to see.

The estimated free running motion from the error and actuation signals agrees very well. This ensures the precision of the caibration in the precious entries.

Attachment 1: PMC_OLTF.pdf
Attachment 2: PMC_DSP.pdf
873   Sat Aug 23 09:39:51 2008 rana, jenneUpdatePSLPMC Survey
Jenne, Rana

We scoped out the PMC situation yesterday.

Summary: Not broke. UGF ~ 500 Hz. Needs some electronics work (notches, boosts, LPFs)

Ever since we swapped out the PMC because of the broken PZT of the previous one, the UGF has been
limited to a low value. This is because the notches no longer match the mechanical resonant
frequencies of the body. The old one had a resonance at 31.3 kHz which we were notching using
the LC notch on the board as well as a dangling Pomona box in the HV line to the PZT. The one
has a resonance at ~14.5 kHz which we don't yet have a notch for. Jenne has all the real numbers and
will update this entry with them.

Todo:
• Implement the 4th order Grote low pass after the mixer.
• Replace the AD797 with an OP27.
• Change servo filter to have a boost (need DC gain)
• Make a 14.5 kHz notch for the bode mode.
• Put a 20 lb. gold-foil wrapped lead brick on the PMC.

Here's the link about the modified PMC board which we installed at LHO:
LHO PMC elog 2006
4375   Thu Mar 3 20:30:03 2011 ranaSummaryPSLPMC Sweeps @ different input power levels to measure the Finesse

Its been well noted in the past that sweeping the PMC at high power leads to a distortion of the transmitted power curve. The explanation for this was coating absorption and thermo-elastic deformation of the front face of the mirrors.

Today, I did several sweeps of the PMC. I turned off its servo and tuned its PZT so that it was nearly resonating. Then I drove the NPRO via the HV driver (gain=15) with 0-150 V (its 1.1 MHz/V) to measure the PMC transmitted light. I adjusted the NPRO pump diode current from 2A on down to see if the curves have a power dependent width.

In the picasa web slideshow:

There are 3 significant differences between this measurement and the one by John linked above: its a new PMC (Rick says its the cleanest one around), the sweep is faster - since I'm using a scope instead of the ADC I feel free to drive the thing by ~70 MHz in one cycle. In principle, we could go faster, but I don't want to get into the region where we excite the PZT resonance. Doing ~100 MHz in ~30 ms should be OK. I think it may be that going this fast avoids some of the thermal distortion problems that John and others have seen in the past. On the next iteration, we should increase the modulation index for the 35.5 MHz sidebands so as to get a higher precision calibration of the sweep's range.

By eye I find that the FWHM from image #4 is 11 ms long. That corresponds to 300 mV on the input to the HV box and 15 V on the PZT and ~16.5 MHz of frequency shift. I think we expect a number more like 4-5 MHz; measurement suspicious.

4417   Mon Mar 21 13:26:25 2011 KojiUpdatePSLPMC Trans/RFPDDC

PMC TRANS/REFL on MEDM showed red values for long time.
TRANS (a.k.a C1:PSL-PSL_TRANSPD) was the issue of the EPICS db.

REFL (a.k.a. C1:PSL-PMC_RFPDDC) was not physically connected.
There was an unknown BNC connected to the PMC DC output instead of dedicated SMA cable.
So they were swapped.

Now I run the following commands to change the EPICS thresholds:

ezcawrite C1:PSL-PMC_PMCTRANSPD.LOLO 0.8 ezcawrite C1:PSL-PMC_PMCTRANSPD.LOW 0.85 ezcawrite C1:PSL-PMC_PMCTRANSPD.HIGH 0.95 ezcawrite C1:PSL-PMC_PMCTRANSPD.HIHI 1 ezcawrite C1:PSL-PMC_RFPDDC.HIHI 0.05 ezcawrite C1:PSL-PMC_RFPDDC.HIGH 0.03 ezcawrite C1:PSL-PMC_RFPDDC.LOW 0.0 ezcawrite C1:PSL-PMC_RFPDDC.LOLO 0.0

As these commands only give us the tempolary fix, /cvs/cds/caltech/target/c1psl/psl.db was accordingly modified for the permanent one.

grecord(ai,"C1:PSL-PMC_RFPDDC") {         field(DESC,"RFPDDC- RFPD DC output")         field(DISV,"1")         field(SCAN,".1 second")         field(DTYP,"VMIVME-3113")         field(INP,"#C0 S32 @")         field(EGUF,"10")         field(EGUL,"-10")         field(EGU,"Volts")         field(PREC,"3")         field(LOPR,"-10")         field(HOPR,"10")         field(AOFF,"0")         field(LINR,"LINEAR")         field(LOW,"0.0")         field(LSV,"MINOR")         field(LOLO,"0.0")         field(LLSV,"MAJOR")         field(HIGH,"0.03")         field(HSV,"MINOR")         field(HIHI,"0.05")         field(HSV,"MAJOR") }

grecord(ai,"C1:PSL-PMC_PMCTRANSPD") {         field(DESC,"PMCTRANSPD- pre-modecleaner transmitted light")         field(DISV,"1")         field(SCAN,".1 second")         field(DTYP,"VMIVME-3123")         field(INP,"#C0 S10 @")         field(EGUF,"10")         field(EGUL,"-10")         field(EGU,"volts")         field(PREC,"3")         field(LINR,"LINEAR")         field(HOPR,"10")         field(LOPR,"-10")         field(AOFF,"0")         field(LOW,"0.8")         field(LSV,"MINOR")         field(LOLO,"0.85")         field(LLSV,"MAJOR")         field(HIGH,"0.95")         field(HSV,"MINOR")         field(HIHI,"1.00")         field(HSV,"MAJOR") }

10849   Tue Dec 30 20:35:59 2014 ranaSummaryPSLPMC Tune Up
1. Calibrated the Phase Adjust slider for the PMC RF Modulation; did this by putting the LO and RF Mod out on the TDS 3034 oscope and triggering on the LO. This scope has a differential phase measurement feature for periodic signals.
2. Calibrated the RF Amp Adj slider for the PMC RF Modulation (on the phase shifter screen)
3. The PMC 35.5 MHz Frequency reference card is now in our 40m DCC Tree.
4.  The LO and RF signals both look fairly sinusoidal !
5. Took photos of our Osc board - they are on the DCC page. Our board is D980353-B-C, but there are no such modern version in any DCC.
6. The PMC board's Mixer Out shows a few mV of RF at multiples of the 35.5 MHz mod freq. This comes in via the LO, and can't be gotten rid of by using a BALUN or BP filters.
7. In installed the LARK 35.5 MHz BP filter that Valera sent us awhile ago (Steve has the datasheet to scan and upload to this entry). It is narrow and has a 2 dB insertion loss.

For tuning the phase and amplitude of the mod. drive:

- since we don't have access to both RF phases, I just maximized the gain using the RF phase slider. First, I flipped the sign using the 'phase flip' button so that we would be near the linear range of the slider. Then I put the servo close to oscillation and adjusted the phase to maximize the height of the ~13 kHz body mode. For the amplitude, I just cranked the modulation depth until it started to show up as a reduction in the transmission by ~0.2%, then reduced it by a factor of ~3. That makes it ~5x larger than before.

Attachment 1: 17.png
Attachment 2: PMCcal.ipynb.xz
Attachment 3: PMC_Osc_Cal.pdf
15144   Thu Jan 23 14:37:05 2020 gautamUpdatePSLPMC VGA chip damaged?

[jordan, gautam]

Summary:

The AD602 chip which implements the overall servo gain for the PMC seems to be damaged. We should switch this out at the next opportunity.

Details:

1. According to the PSL cross connect wiring diagram, the VME DAC that provides the control voltage to the VGA stage goes to pins 7/8 of cross connect J16.
• Jordan and I verified that the voltage at this point [Vout], is related to the PMC_GAIN EPICS slider [dB] value according to the following relationship: $V_{\mathrm{out}} = (10-\mathrm{dB})/2$.
2. On the PMC servo board, this voltage is scaled by a factor of -1/10.
• This was confirmed by peeking at this voltage using a DMM (I clipped onto R31) while the gain slider was varied.
• This corresponds to +/- 1000 mV reaching the AD602.
• However, the AD602 is rated to work with a control voltage varying between +/- 625 mV.
• What this means is that the EPICS slider value is not the gain of the AD602 stage. The latter is given by the relation $G [\mathrm{dB}] = 32 \times V_{\mathrm{G}} + 10$.
• @team PSL upgrade: this should be fixed in the database file for the new c1psl machine.
3. Using TP1 and TP2 connected to the SR785, I measured the transfer function of the AD602 for various values of the EPICS slider.
• Result is shown in Attachment #1.
• I did this measurement with the PMC locked, so I'm using the in-loop error signal to infer the gain of the VGA stage.
• As expected, the absolute value of the gain does not match that of the EPICS slider (note that the AD602 has an input impedance of 100 ohms. So the 499 ohm series resistor between TP1 and the input of AD602 makes a 1/5 voltage divider, so the gain seen between TP1 and TP2 has this factor folded in).
• Moreover, the relative scaling of the gain for various slider values also doesn't appear to be liner.
• For the highest gain setting of +15 dB, the servo began oscillating, so I think the apparent non-flatness of the gain as a function of frequency is an artefact of the measurement.
• Nevertheless, my conclusion is that the IC should be changed.

I will pull the board and effect the change later today.

I pulled the board out at 345pm after dialling down all the HV supplies in 1X1. I will reinstall it after running some tests.

Attachment 1: VGAchar.pdf
15146   Thu Jan 23 16:37:14 2020 ranaUpdatePSLPMC VGA chip damaged?

doesn't seem so anomolous to me; we're getting ~25 dB of gain range and the ideal range would be 40 dB. My guess is that even thought this is not perfect, the real problem is elsewhere.

1877   Mon Aug 10 16:41:31 2009 AlbertoConfigurationPSLPMC Visibility

Alberto, Rana

lately we've been trying to better understand what's preventing the arm power to get high again. Last week I tuned the MZ and the PMC but we didn't gain much, if nothing at all.
Yesterday I measured the transmissivity, the reflectivity and the visibility of the PMC.

From the voltages at the PMC-REFL PD when the PMC was locked and when it was out of lock I estimated the cavity visibility:
V_locked = 0.42V
V_unlocked = 1.64V -> V = (V_unlocked - V_locked) / V_unlocked = 75%

With the high power meter I measured the reflected power when the PMC was unlocked and used that to obtain the calibration of the PMC-REFL PD: 1.12V/W.

Since the locked-cavity reflected power can't be directly measured with a power meter (since that would use the cavity control signal), I estimated the reflected power by the calibration of the PMC-REFL PD. Then I measured the input and the transmitted power with a high-power meter.
Result:

P_in = 1.98W ; P_trans = 1.28W ; P_refl = 0.45W

From that I estimated that the losses account to 13% of the input power.

I checked both the new and the old elogs to see if such a measurement had ever been done but it doesn't seems so. I don't know if such a value for the visibility is "normal". It seems a little low. For instance, as a comparison, the MC visibility, is equal to a few percents.

Also Rana measured the transmitted power after locking the PMC on the TEM20-02: the photodiode on the MEDM screen read 0.325V. That means that a lot of power is going to that mode.

That makes us think that we're dealing with a mode matching problem with the PMC.

10742   Mon Dec 1 17:19:22 2014 JenneUpdateGeneralPMC align

[Diego, Jenne]

Tweaked up the input alignment to the PMC.  Now we're at 0.785.

4648   Thu May 5 20:47:41 2011 KojiUpdatePSLPMC aligned

The PMC exhibited the reduction of the transmission, so it was aligned.

The misalignment was not the angle of the beam but the translation of the beam in the vertical direction
as I had no improvement by moving the pitch of one mirror and had to move those two differentially.

This will give us the information what is moving by the temperature fluctuation or whatever.

5644   Mon Oct 10 15:41:56 2011 KojiUpdatePSLPMC aligned

[Koji Suresh]

The steering mirrors for PMC were aligned. The transmission went up from 0.779 to 0.852.

6569   Wed Apr 25 19:36:19 2012 DenUpdatePSLPMC aligned

[Koji, Den]

We have aligned PMC,  the WFS are not working yet.

7273   Fri Aug 24 20:48:10 2012 KojiUpdatePSLPMC aligned

as usual.

9256   Mon Oct 21 13:15:52 2013 KojiUpdateIOOPMC aligned

PMC aligned. Trans 0.78 -> 0.83

10950   Wed Jan 28 17:32:26 2015 KojiUpdatePSLPMC aligned

PMC aligned.

PMC Trans increased from 0.740 to 0.782

IMC Trans increased from 16200 to 17100

8470   Mon Apr 22 12:03:58 2013 KojiUpdatePSLPMC aligned too

PMC aligned. C1:PSL-PMC-PMCTRANSPD improved from 0.72ish to 0.835ish.

2168   Mon Nov 2 13:00:55 2009 KojiUpdateIOOPMC aligned, MC WFS aligned

The beam to PMC aligned. The beam to MC WFS cameras aligned.
PMC Trans increased from 2.73 to 2.75 (+1%).
MC Trans increased from 7.80 to 7.87 (+1%).

12792   Thu Feb 2 18:32:51 2017 ranaSummaryPSLPMC alignment

Re-aligned the beam going into the PMC today around 5 PM. I noticed that its all in pitch and since I moved both of the mirrors by the same amount it is essentially a vertical translation.

I wonder if the PMC is just moving up and down due to thermal expansion in the mount? How else would we get a pure vertical translation? Need to remember next time if the beam goes up or down, and by how many knob turns, and see how it correlates to the lab temperature.

7382   Fri Sep 14 00:33:31 2012 ranaUpdatePSLPMC alignment - mystery in reflected power

The PMC reflection made it seem that the beam going into it was misaligned. I went to the table and aligned the input beam to maximize the PMC transmission. I got ~10% improvement.

Just to check if something was loose, I started tapping things upstream of the Faraday. When I tapped the actual PMC body it seemed to get unseated and the reflected (unlocked) power jumped up by more than a factor of two.

I don't understand how this could be. The attached trend of the PMC channels shows that ever since the PSL upgrade, the PMC refl has been at the low level of ~0.3 V, except for a brief phase soon after the upgrade late in 2010 and then also for a few hours early in May of 2012.

If the PMC body actually moved, it seems that the pointing into the MC would also change and I don't see that. So what else can it be? Is there some clipping or dust or a burn spot on the PMC REFL path?

The PMC refl image was lost after the body re-settled itself. Jenne and I re-aligned it and added a 0.5 ND filter to the existing ND in order to account for the higher power. We should hide all of the reflective ND filters and just use absorbtive ND for the cameras to prevent reflections.

This image of the past hour shows the event at just before midnight (0650 UTC) where the PMC reflection goes up from 0.28 to 0.85.

Attachment 1: pmcr.jpg
Attachment 2: e.png
7292   Tue Aug 28 00:23:54 2012 JenneUpdatePSLPMC alignment going bad

PMC transmission started going down this afternoon, around 3pm-ish.  Right now it's 0.775, which is very, very low.  The new MC locking stuff is engaged, so it's not the FSS slow servo's fault.

EDIT: I just realized that the limit of 0 counts output of the MC2 MCL filter bank was still engaged, from a time earlier this afternoon when I had switched back to the old servo, so there was no feedback going back to keep the slow drift of the laser in check.  PMC trans isn't coming back instantly, so I'll check it again when I come in tomorrow.

Attachment 1: PMC_transmission_GoingDown_27Aug2012.png
7294   Tue Aug 28 11:28:31 2012 ericqUpdatePSLPMC alignment going bad

 Quote: PMC transmission started going down this afternoon, around 3pm-ish.  Right now it's 0.775, which is very, very low.  The new MC locking stuff is engaged, so it's not the FSS slow servo's fault.  EDIT: I just realized that the limit of 0 counts output of the MC2 MCL filter bank was still engaged, from a time earlier this afternoon when I had switched back to the old servo, so there was no feedback going back to keep the slow drift of the laser in check.  PMC trans isn't coming back instantly, so I'll check it again when I come in tomorrow.

By adjusting the PMC steering mirrors, Jenne and I realigned the PMC input beam. Transmission is at 0.829 now.

692   Thu Jul 17 20:13:34 2008 YoichiUpdatePSLPMC alignment/mode matching effort
I'm working to improve the mode matching of PMC.
Because I noticed that the beam was hitting the aperture of the EOM for PMC, I moved the EOM a little bit to maximize the transmission.
This did not change the alignment to the reference cavity but changed the alignment of the PMC a lot.
The alignment of the PMC can be easily optimized but the Hermite 02 mode still remains. This means the mode matching is bad.
Moving the lenses by a small amount (a few mm) did not change the height of 02 mode.
I'm planning to move the lenses by a large amount tomorrow. But it will destroy the alignment to the PMC.
So I installed two irises in the beam path after the lenses to remember the alignment roughly.
Right now the PMC transmission is slightly worse than before because the lens positions are not good.
7501   Mon Oct 8 11:15:53 2012 JenneUpdatePSLPMC and FSS had a weird weekend

Something bizarre-o was going on with the PMC and FSS over the weekend.  On the striptool, PMC's PZT looks like it was doing a sawtooth pattern for several hours.  I opened up the FSS screen, and the FSS SLOWDC had walked itself up to +10.  It's not supposed to get that far from 0.

Here are some trends, so you can see what was going on.

10 day trend:  This weird behavior began ~Friday evening (FSS_SLOWDC ramps quickly).

1 day trend:  You can see the sawtooth pattern in PMC_PZT more clearly here.  It's at the same time as the FSS_SLOWDC is ramping rapidly, and the FSS_FAST is saturated.

Attachment 2: PMC_sawtooth_FSSweird_8Oct2012_1dayTrend.png
14696   Tue Jun 25 15:32:16 2019 gautamUpdateIOOPMC and IMC locked again, some MEDM maintenance

Aaron complained to me earlier that the PMC could not be locked. Turned out to be a classic sticky slider problem, I keyed the c1psl VME crate, and did the usual burtrestore trick. After that, I could immediately lock the PMC and IMC with the nominal gain settings.

I also looked at the wiring at the rack. An SLP250 was installed at the mixer IF output, in parallel with a 50 ohm terminator to ground. I removed this, because as Aaron pointed out, the PMC servo card "FP1 TEST" input is already 50 ohm, and has two cascaded LC filter stages immediately after to filter out the 2f component, so the extra low-pass filtering is superfluous (in any case, 250 MHz is much too high a cutoff to be using for cutting out the 2f component which will be at ~70 MHz).

Finally, in the last ~2 weeks, we have been running with the PMC servo gain of +17 (as opposed to +18 from before). The old gain is too high, as noted by Milind. But the MEDM field for this gain goes RED unless the gain is +18. I adjusted the value of the  C1:PSL-STAT_PMC_NOM_GAIN channel to +17, so that this is no longer the case. I also edited the PMC MEDM screen to get rid of my comment that the "SLOW ADC IS DEAD" for the PMC TRANS field, since I have now hooked up the PMC trans photodiode to our temporary Acromag box.

Attachment 1: PMCctrl.png
14699   Wed Jun 26 10:55:13 2019 aaronUpdateIOOPMC and IMC locked again, some MEDM maintenance

The PMC was locking again after Gautam's steps above. However, after I added the directional coupler between the mixer I and the servo card (coupled to the Agilent analyzer), the PMC was again not locking, except occasionally with gain of -10 dB.

I removed the coupler (so the mixer I goes directly to the PMC servo card, as Gautam had it), and the PMC was still not locking. While checking connections, I noticed that one of the SMA cables between the LO and the mixer was not even finger tight, so I tightened them to approximately the right torque with a non-torque wrench.

This did not lead to the PMC locking, so Millind helped me key the c1psl VME crate. I burt restored the latest snapshot. Now, the PMC locks up until gain of -5. I try burt restoring the previous snapshot, which was from when the PMC was locking, and now it locks. Adding in the directional coupler again leads to the PMC not locking, though this time removing the coupler restores the normal behavior. I also tried using the coupler with the coupling port connected to a 50 Ohm terminator, and this configuration also did not lock.

I had been using a ZFDC-20-5-S+ (0.1-2000 MHz) with SMA ports and SMA-to-BNC on the input and output ports (since the mixer has BNC connectors). To reduce the number of potentially flaky connections, I am trying the ZFDC-20-4 (1-1000 MHz) that I found with BNC ports. The PMC still doesn't lock.

To get some spectrum, I've connected the PMC servo card's 'mixer out' to the Agilent's A channel, and collected a spectra from [10 Hz, 75 kHz], [75 kHz, 750 kHz], and [750 kHz, 2 MHz].

Wed Jun 26 15:23:37 2019

After the lab cleaning, I added a BNC T on the mixer I port, so now the configuration is:

Mixer I -> BNC T

-> PMC Servo card FP1TEST

-> directional coupler -> coupled to the spectrum analyzer, out port is terminated with 50 Ohms.

I thought maybe the issue was that the TF from in->out on the directional coupler is not what I expect (and Gautam suggested the in-out port might block DC), but the PMC still does not lock in the above configuration, in which the coupler is not between the mixer and the servo board--so only reflections from the coupler should matter, I think.

However, even when I plug the mixer directly into the servo board, the PMC is not locking (again) with gain above -8 dB or so. I did a burt restore again, and this fixed the problem. I wasn't sure why this burt restore is working, because all I am changing is the DC output adjust voltage and the gain, and switching on/off FP1TEST. However, I observed that after running the PMC autolocking script, observing that the autolocker did not achieve lock as it swept through resonance, and cancelling the autolocker, the PMC again cannot be locked for high gains. When I let the autolocker complete, this doesn't happen, so probably I'm just not letting some channel return to its nominal value after being changed by the autolocker.

Now after another burt restore, I'm avoiding using the autolocker and am still having trouble locking with the BNC T + directional coupler configuration above. However, now I'm noticing that the PZT control mon is always railed, as long as FP1TEST is in the loop (and independent of the output adjust voltage). I try returning to the 'baseline' configuration (mixer -> PMC servo card directly), and the PMC locks but with only 0.68 V transmission (was >0.7 V before).

Per Gautam's earlier suggestion, I switched to using the Agilent 41800A probe instead of the directional coupler. I was able to lock the OMC with this probe on a BNC T coming out of the mixer (transmission is 0.71 V). I recorded the spectra of the PMC servo board's "Mixer Out" channel, and the mixer's I as seen by the probe. I recorded spectra from 10 Hz to 100 MHz. The soft linked netgpibdata folder I had in my users directory is no longer soft linked--presumably intentional so I don't tamper with it?

I'm a bit skeptical that I've used the probe correctly, so I'm checking out the manual.

Indeed, I needed to pull back the sheath; I also noticed that the GPIB script I've been using doesn't save the data from both channels when I take a spectrum in dual mode, so I'm taking the spectra again one at a time (lights are on, IMC is locked).

14700   Wed Jun 26 11:11:40 2019 MilindUpdateIOOPMC and IMC locked again, some MEDM maintenance

After helping Aaron key the crate and do a burt restore, I realized that it would probably be best to record the steps that Koji showed me to do a burt restore as a reference for (anyone) the future

Commands (in terminal):

1. burttoday: changes to the directory with snapshots for the day (/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/burt/autoburt/today)
2. burtgooey: opens a new window with several buttons of which "Restore" needs to be selected. This opens up a second window as shown in Attachment #1. Click on Snapshot files and navigate to the snapshot you wish to restore (these are present at /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/burt/autoburt/snapshots) and select that. A green "OK" button indicates if the Restore can be performed without a hitch. Hit "Restore" to perform the burtrestore.

Also Gautam explained today that the sticky slider problem is a hardware issue. That it basically means that the signal (voltage output for instance) that you request from the medm screen is not what the hardware delivers. Twice now, we have got around that with a burtrestore. My understanding of a burt restore is that it is a restoration of values from a certain time to the EPICS channels. Therefore, I don't understand why a restoration at the software level should fix how the hardware responds? Why does this happen?

Attachment 1: burtgooey.pdf
14701   Wed Jun 26 18:28:24 2019 ranaUpdateIOOPMC and IMC locked again, some MEDM maintenance

a useful piece of code that we should ask one of this summer's SURFs to write:

1. read in a BURT .req file which is usually used to make the autosnap / restore.
2. change ALL of the values to some value (slightly different from its current value)
3. restore it to its current value

this will solve the sticky slider problem and do it in a systematic way. We can run it from the command line: e.g. 'unsticky.py c1psl c1ioo c1lsc'

 Quote: Aaron complained to me earlier that the PMC could not be locked. Turned out to be a classic sticky slider problem,
14711   Sun Jun 30 22:21:07 2019 MilindUpdateIOOPMC and IMC locked again, some MEDM maintenance

Wrote the script. It currently lives at /users/milind/NonlinearControl/milind/unstick/unstick.py. Also pushed it to the repo here. It does the following:

1. When run as python unstick.py c1aux (for instance) from the terminal, it parses the autoBurt.req file at /cvs/cds/caltech/target/c1aux/autoBurt.req and obtains the channels.
2. Iterates through the channels and changes it to "some value"
1. For channels corresponding to buttons on MEDM screen (Enable/Disable etc.) toggles between 0 and 1
2. For channels corresponding to continuous values (such as say exposure time or the like) changes to abs(1+current_value)
3. Resets to original value and then moves to the next channel

I tried print statements instead of actually writing to the channels as Gautam asked me to do that with supervision. Is this good enough?

Quote:

a useful piece of code that we should ask one of this summer's SURFs to write:

1. read in a BURT .req file which is usually used to make the autosnap / restore.
2. change ALL of the values to some value (slightly different from its current value)
3. restore it to its current value

this will solve the sticky slider problem and do it in a systematic way. We can run it from the command line: e.g. 'unsticky.py c1psl c1ioo c1lsc'

 Quote: Aaron complained to me earlier that the PMC could not be locked. Turned out to be a classic sticky slider problem,
14712   Sun Jun 30 23:52:09 2019 KojiUpdateIOOPMC and IMC locked again, some MEDM maintenance

> For channels corresponding to continuous values (such as say exposure time or the like) changes to abs(1+current_value)

Why abs? Is the current_value is like -5.4321 (for example for the alignment slider), this returns +4.4321 and the suspension will suffer from huge motion (well it will be returned to the original value soon though).

14713   Mon Jul 1 11:02:05 2019 MilindUpdateIOOPMC and IMC locked again, some MEDM maintenance

Made changes as discussed in this issue. Further, I need to add signal handling capabilities to the code. I belive Jon has pointed me to some code. I will take a look at that ASAP.

 Quote: > For channels corresponding to continuous values (such as say exposure time or the like) changes to abs(1+current_value) Why abs? Is the current_value is like -5.4321 (for example for the alignment slider), this returns +4.4321 and the suspension will suffer from huge motion (well it will be returned to the original value soon though).
13703   Mon Mar 26 10:15:20 2018 ArijitUpdateIOOPMC and IMC re-locked

[Gautam, Arijit]

PMC and IMC re-aligned and re-locked. Both cavities are staying locked. Arm cavities are also locked.

14198   Mon Sep 17 12:28:19 2018 gautamUpdateIOOPMC and IMC relocked, WFS inputs turned off

The PMC and IMC were unlocked. Both were re-locked, and alignment of both cavities were adjusted so as to maximize MC2 trans (by hand, input alignment to PMC tweaked on PSL table, IMC alignment tweaked using slow bias voltages). I disabled the inputs to the WFS loops, as it looks like they are not able to deal with the glitching IMC suspensions. c1lsc models have crashed again but I am not worrying about that for now.

9pm: The alignment is wandering all over the place so I'm just closing the PSL shutter for now.

14200   Tue Sep 18 17:56:01 2018 not gautamUpdateIOOPMC and IMC relocked, WFS inputs turned off

I restarted the LSC models in the usual way via the c1lsc reboot script. After doing this I was able to lock the YARM configuration for more noise coupling scripting.

 Quote: The PMC and IMC were unlocked. Both were re-locked, and alignment of both cavities were adjusted so as to maximize MC2 trans (by hand, input alignment to PMC tweaked on PSL table, IMC alignment tweaked using slow bias voltages). I disabled the inputs to the WFS loops, as it looks like they are not able to deal with the glitching IMC suspensions. c1lsc models have crashed again but I am not worrying about that for now. 9pm: The alignment is wandering all over the place so I'm just closing the PSL shutter for now.

17201   Thu Oct 20 14:13:42 2022 yutaSummaryPSLPMC and IMC sideband frequencies measured

I measured the sideband frequencies for PMC and IMC lock (to use it for Mariner PMC and IMC design).

PMC: 35.498912(2) MHz
IMC: 29.485038(2) MHz

Details:
- Mini-Circuits UFC-6000 was used. The spec sheet says the frequency accuracy in 1-40 MHz is +/- 2 Hz.
- "29.5 MHz OUT" port of 40m Frequency Generation Unit (LIGO-T1000461) was connected to UFC-6000 to measure IMC sideband frequency.
- "LO TO SERVO" port of Crystal Frequency Ref (LIGO-D980353) was connected to UFC-6000 to measure PMC sideband frequency.
- It seems like IMC sideband frequency changed from 29.485 MHz to 29.491 MHz back in 2011 (40m/4621). We are back to 29.485 MHz. I'm not sure what happened after this.

Attachment 1: IMC.JPG
Attachment 2: PMC.JPG
9175   Mon Sep 30 13:02:51 2013 Masayuki,ManasaUpdateIOOPMC and MC alignment

[Manasa, Masayuki]

The MC lost lock around 8+hrs ago. The transmission from PMC was 0.77 this morning, so we aligned the PSL to the PMC using the two steering mirrors before the PMC. We brought the PMC transmission to 0.841. We also aligned the MC, and the MC transmission reflection now is 0.59.

6107   Mon Dec 12 15:24:21 2011 JenneUpdatePSLPMC and MC were both crappy - now realigned

PMC trans was only ~0.79, where it should be ~0.84 something.  The MC was also not stellar.

I aligned the beam to the PMC, and am now getting PMC trans 0.837 .

Then I aligned the PSL zigzag to the MC, and got MC Refl down to ~0.6 .

I then aligned the WFS to the unlocked MC, and the MC Trans QPD to the locked MC.

Things seem good.  MC axis is still in a good place, since we get good michelson fringes at the AS port.

297   Tue Feb 5 15:32:29 2008 josephbConfigurationCamerasPMC and the GigE Camera
The PMC transmission video camera has been removed and replaced with the GigE GC750 camera for the moment.

A ND4.0 filter has been added in the path to that camera to reduce saturation for the moment.

The old camera has been placed on the elevated section inside the enclosure, and the cable for it is still on the table proper.

The Gige camera is currently running the Snap code on Linux3 with the following command line:

./Snap -E 2000 -l 60 -m 1440 -f './pmc_trans/pmc_trans'

So its going to be taking tiff images every minute for the next 24 hours into the cvs/cds/caltech/target/Prosilica/40mCode/pmc_trans/ directory.

Attached is an example image with exposure set to 2000, loaded into matlab and plotted with the surf command. 2500 microseconds looked like it was still saturating, but this seems to be a good level (with a max of 58560 out of 65535).
Attachment 1: pmc_trans.jpg
15498   Tue Jul 21 16:41:46 2020 gautamUpdateBHDPMC assembly space

I decided to use the old EY auxiliary optics table, which is now stored along the east arm about 10 m from the end, as a workspace for assembling the little PMCs. I wiped everything down with isopropanol for general cleanliness, removed the metal plate on the south edge of the table enclosure to allow access, covered the table with some clean Aluminium foil, and then moved the plastic box with PMC parts to the table - see Attachment #1. I haven't actually done any assembly just yet, waiting for more info (if available) on the procedure and implements available...

Attachment 1: IMG_8635.JPG
9333   Mon Nov 4 09:03:21 2013 SteveUpdatePSLPMC auto locker

 Quote: I was working on the electronics bench and what sounded like a huge truck rolled by outside. I didn't notice anything until now, but It looks like something became misaligned when the truck passed by (~6:45-6:50 pm). I can hear a lot of noise coming out of the control room speakers and pretty much all of the IOO plots on the wall have sharp discontinuities. I haven't been moving around much for the past 2 hours so I don't think it was me, but I thought it was worth noting.

The PMC auto locker is not set to acquire error message made me lock PMC manually.  Arms  locked instantly: TRY 0.9 V and TRX 0.65 V

Attachment 1: 3dTREND.png
6670   Thu May 24 01:17:13 2012 DenUpdateCDSPMC autolocker

 Quote: SCRIPT Auto-locker for PMC, PSL things - DEN

I wrote auto-locker for PMC. It is called autolocker_pmc, located in the scripts directory, svn commited. I connected it to the channel C1:PSL-PMC_LOCK.  It is currently running on rosalba. MC autolocker runs on op340m, but I could not execute the script on that machine

op340m:scripts>./autolock_pmc
./autolock_pmc: Stale NFS file handle.

I did several tests, usually, the script locks PMC is a few seconds. However, if PMC DC output has been drift significantly, if might take longer as discussed below.

The algorithm:

if autolocker if enabled, monitor PSL-PMC_PMCTRANSPD channel
if TRANS is less then 0.4, start locking:
disengage PMC servo by enabling PMC TEST 1
change PSL-PMC_RAMP unless TRANS is higher then 0.4 (*)
engage PMC servo by disabling PMC TEST 1
else sleep for 1 sec

(*) is tricky. If RAMP (DC offset) is specified then TRANS will be oscillating in the range ( TRANS_MIN, TRANS_MAX ). We are interested only in the TRANS_MAX. To make sure, we estimate it right, TRANS channel is read 10 times and the maximum value is chosen. This works good.

Next problem is to find the proper range and step to vary DC offset RAMP. Of coarse, we can choose the maximum range (-7, 0) and minimum step 0.0001, but it will take too long to find the proper DC offset. For that reason autolocker tries to find a resonance close to the previous DC offset in the range (RAMP_OLD - delta, RAMP_OLD + delta), initial delta is 0.03 and step is 0.003. It resonance is not found in this region, then delta is multiplied by a factor of 2 and so on. During this process RAMP range is controlled not to be wider then (-7, 0).

The might be a better way to do this. For example, use the gradient descent algorithm and control the step adaptively. I'll do that if this realization will be too slow.

I've disabled autolocker_pmc for the night.

ELOG V3.1.3-