40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab CAML OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 191 of 354  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Type Categoryup Subject
  9898   Fri May 2 02:22:56 2014 rana, QUpdateIOOMC alignments

We were having unstable MC locking so we did some physical alignment touch up. Use MC suspension bias to have good MC alignment. Unlock MC and align DC beams to center on WFS. Re-lock and things are now stable.

Someone had been feeding bad info to Eric about MC alignments; we do not center the MC WFS beams with the MC locked.

However, in any case, today the MC2-TRANS servo was not being good so I turned it off. We need the real matrix measurement to bring it back.

  9901   Fri May 2 08:38:07 2014 SteveUpdateIOOthis typical morning

 

 c1sus needed reset.

Attachment 1: 2dTrend.png
2dTrend.png
  9907   Sun May 4 14:20:04 2014 ericqUpdateIOOPMC relocked

The PMC has been unlocked for ~23 hours. FSS slow was at ~-1.5 V. I zeroed it, and relocked the PMC, transmission is ~0.81V. MC with WFS came back fine.

  9981   Wed May 21 11:11:01 2014 manasaUpdateIOOMC tuned

I found MC unlocked this morning. I looked at the 2 day trend of the MC suspensions and found MC2 suspensions have been misaligned.

I used Rana's ezcaservo trick to recover MC lock. This brought the MC_REFL down to 0.7 counts. I did the rest of the alignment by moving the MC2 suspension sliders only. MC_REFL is down to 0.45-0.5 counts and TRANS_SUM is at ~16300.

Also, I found the WFS servo was left turned OFF. I re-enabled them as well.

Attachment 1: MC_SUS2days.png
MC_SUS2days.png
  9999   Wed May 28 14:13:06 2014 manasaUpdateIOOMC relocked

Quote:

MC wouldn't relock, it looked misaligned in pitch and yaw on MC camera.

I've touched the alignment, and gotten the reflection below 0.5, but it unlocks periodically, spot positions aren't great, and turning on WFS throws it out of alignment. ughhhhh


The IMC has not been happy since the weekend and were left with WFS disabled because of the bad alignment state that the MC has been left at.

I realigned the MC mirrors and brought down MC_REFL to 0.42 and MC_TRANS_SUM came up to ~ 17400 counts.

I measured the spot positions after alignment. MC1 and MC3 are slightly off in pitch :

spot positions in mm (MC1,2,3 pit MC1,2,3 yaw):
[2.0535418031770249, 0.84870716159663184, 1.9759940800847962, -1.6706240175650202, 0.089441353070240759, -1.0339963871771678]

I reset the WFS filterbank offsets and engaged the MCWFS servo. Atleast now the MC is not being thrown out of lock with WFS enabled. I have NOT touched the alignment to the WFS PDs.

  10017   Mon Jun 9 23:08:58 2014 JenneUpdateIOOMC board checkout

Rana mentioned this in his elog entry re: SLOW computer recovery, but I want to highlight it:

We cannot yet lock the mode cleaner.

It seems that we need to be aware of the sticky slider issue that we have seen for years (although don't deal with too often) that a burt restore will make it seem like an EPICS channel is at some value, but in fact it is at some other value.  For any sliders or buttons in question, change the value by some amount, and then change it back.  This forces things to refresh, and it'll then be at the value that is reported.

However, for the MC board, this seems to not be enough.  Changing the offset slider doesn't seem to actually change the offset value.  The fast output of the MC board is railed at 9.996 V.  So.  We need to check out the MC servo board and ensure that we are actually connected and talking to it through the c1iool0 (C1i-oh-oh-L-zero, to make the characters more clear) slow machine.

  10038   Fri Jun 13 19:09:44 2014 KojiUpdateIOOA blown fuse found on the euro card crate at 1X2 (IOO) rack.

[Rana Zach Koji]

We tracked down the MC locking issue to be associated with the power supply problem.
Replacing a fuse which had incomplete connection with the new one, the MC started locking.

We still have the MC autolocker not running correctly. This is solely a software problem.


We went down to the IOO electronics rack to investigate the electronics there. After spending
some time to poking around the test points of the MC servo board, we noticed that the -24V
power indicator on the MC demodulator module was not lit. In fact, Steve mentioned on Wednesday
that the -24V Sorensen supply had lower current than nominal. This actually was a good catch
but should have been written in the ELOG!!!

We traced the power supply wires for the crate and found one of the three -24V supply has no
voltage on it. Inspection of the corresponding fuse revealed that it had a peculiar failure mode.
The blown LED was not lit. The connection was not reliable and the -24V power supply was flickering.

We then replaced the fuse.This simply solved all of the issues on the MC servo board. The electronics
should be throughly inspected if it still has the nominal performance or not, as the boards were exposed
to the single supply more than a week. But we decided to try locking ability first of all.

Yes, we now can lock the MC as usual.

Now the newly revealed issue is MC autolocker. It was running on op340m but op340m does not want to run it now.
It should be closely investigated.

Also turning on WFS unlocks the MC. Currently the WFS outputs are turned off.
We need usual align MC / check spot position / adjust WFS QPD spots combo.

  10039   Sat Jun 14 18:43:15 2014 ranaUpdateIOOMC Autolocker upgrades

 Somehow the caget/caput commands are really slow. I'm not sure if this is new behavior or not, but after changing values, it takes ~1-2 seconds to move on to the next command.

On op340m, once I ran autolockMCmain40m in the foreground, I could see that there were a lot of error messages that weren't being caught in the log file. On Solaris, the TDS and EZCA binaries work well, but the caget/pu stuff is missing a lot of the new flags and the new CDSUTILS python scripts are not there. So I decided to stop running on there and move over to running the MC autolocker on megatron. I also changes the mcup and mcdown scripts to BASH from CSH. There are still some PERL commands in there from Rob/Matt/Sam, so I also added the proper commands so that the pick up the scripts/general/perlmodules/ directory.

Yes, yes, I know. You would all feel warm in your tummy if we did everything in python because its the best language ever, but how about we lock the interferometer first and then we can rewrite all the last decades worth of scripts?

Looked at the trend from the last time the MCWFS were one (2 weeks ago!) and aligned the MC suspension back to that point. After that the WFS come on fine and MC looks good. I fixed the nameserver/DNS/fstab stuff on megatron, asia, and belladonna.

I've left AutoLockMC.csh (too painful to convert to BASH) running on megatron via an open terminal on pianosa. If it looks OK for the weekend, Q should move the crontab line from op340m over to megatron and then update the Wiki appropriately.

CDSUTILS is also gone from the path on all the workstations, so we need Jamie to tell us by ELOG how to set it up, or else we have to use ezcaread / ezcawrite forever.

  10042   Mon Jun 16 12:58:50 2014 manasaSummaryIOORingdown recap

A recap of the ringdown measurements made at the 40m in mid 2012, the hardware that was installed for the same and results from the measurements.

IMC ringdown:

Hardware installed 
A trans PD was installed (elog 7122).
This PD does not exist in the trans path anymore.

Measurements
The polarity in the MC servo was flipped with the MC WFS disabled and the PD trans signal was used to look at the cavity ringdown. 
Ringdown time = 13 us
Cavity finesse from the measurement = 453 (inconsistent with actual finesse). 

Attachment: Ringdown measurement and fits

PMC ringdown:

Hardware installed
The AOM was installed before the PMC. The AOM was driven by the driver installed on the PSL table. (RF power ~1.5W @ 80MHz @1.0V modulation input). An RF switch was installed to control the AOM driver input. ZASWA-2-50DR+ was installed.
Note: The AOM was used by the ISS crew after this. So the RF switch has been removed and the AOM is no more a part of the ringdown setup.

Measurements
No measurements were made as we could not obtain relevant TTL signals to control the switch remotely.

Attachment 1: Ringdown_815.pdf
Ringdown_815.pdf
Attachment 2: MCringdown_cum.pdf
MCringdown_cum.pdf
Attachment 3: cum_plot.png
cum_plot.png
  10043   Mon Jun 16 15:32:12 2014 ranaSummaryIOORingdown recap

 

To do this better:

1) Just step the analog input to the AOM (i.e. no RF switch) and measure the PMC trans output with a fast DC coupled PD. IMC should be unlocked and disable during this part. We want the PMC ringdown to be faster than 1 us.

2) Re-install a fast PD in the MC trans path without disrupting the existing MC trans QPD setup.

3) Measure IMC ringdown and fit the data to find the cavity losses.

4) Think about how to use the Isogai, et. al (2013) technique to better measure the losses, taking into account the mirror transmissions.

  10064   Wed Jun 18 21:37:11 2014 KojiUpdateIOOMC REFL investigation

[Jenne Koji]

We decided to check the situation of the REFL MC beam path.

- No resolution of the weird MC REFL DC increase
- The reflection from the PD was adjusted to hit the beam dump
- The MC WFS paths were aligned again


Detail:

We found that the reflected beam from the PD was hitting the mount of the beam dump.
So the entire MC REFL path was steered down such that the last steering mirror does not neet to steer the beam.
When the alignment was adjusted so that the reflection from PD hit the beam dump, the beam spot on the small mirror right before the PD
got a bit marginal but it seemed still OK after some tweak.

Then we looked at the reflection value. It is still about 6.5. No change.

As we messed up the entire MC REFL path, we aligned the MC WFS paths again.
This was done with the unlocked MC REFL beam. Once the cavity was locked,
it turned out that it was enough for the WFS too keep the MC locked.

  10066   Wed Jun 18 22:34:44 2014 ericqUpdateIOOcaget frusrtation

Quote:

 Somehow the caget/caput commands are really slow. I'm not sure if this is new behavior or not, but after changing values, it takes ~1-2 seconds to move on to the next command.

This is still happening. Specifically: on all of the control room computers, calls to caget display the result immediately, but then hang for five seconds (consistently five). We had also seen a situation where calls hang indefinitely on ottavia/pianosa, but a reboot "fixes" this.

Some observations:

  • Front end machines and the FB have proper caget/caput response times.
  • Control room machines have some odd ping behavior when targeting frontends/FB; namely the ping times themselves are ok, but each ping line takes quite some time to show up, which made us think that there is odd network routing issue happening with some network switch. 
  • Front ends and FB get epics from /opt/rtapps, whereas control room machines get epics from /ligo/apps, which has different contents. (Is this for Gentoo vs. Ubuntu? I don't really get why this is the case...). This means different environment setting scripts to be called, so maybe the control room machines are misconfigured in some way for the new name server?

I poked around the network settings on all of these machines, but everything seemed reasonable. Nothing was changed. Rossa and Pianosa have their network settings done through some Ubuntu GUI, but I don't know where the settings are written. I had expected their settings to be in /etc/network/interfaces; maybe we should change this to be consistent with other machines, and easier to administrate via the terminal. 

Despite all this, ezcaread is fine.

  10078   Fri Jun 20 09:46:49 2014 manasaUpdateIOOMC WFS servo turned ON

The IMC stayed locked last night, but with  a high REFL ~3.0. I found the WFS servo OFF; so went ahead and enabled it. (Did somebody disable it for reasons not elog'd?)

MC returned to a happy state. But the WFS offsets are quite large. So I tweaked the alignment and got MC REFL down to ~0.45 and MC TRANS SUM to ~16500 counts. MC WFS offsets also dropped significantly after this without any need to touch the alignment to the WFS PDs.

  10225   Thu Jul 17 01:24:35 2014 ranaUpdateIOOMC / EOM Stability Mystery Solved!

MC loop is near unstable. Common gain reduced. Needs more loop tuning.

We've often seen that the MC gets into a state where it keeps losing lock and the EOM drive shows a large RMS. We've usually been looking at the noise spectrum to diagnose this.

Tonight we finally just measured the OLG. The attached plot shows the loop gain measured with the 4395 on the MC servo board

Although the phase margin is a healthy 45 degrees, its close to instability at 1 MHz. For this plot, I reduced the gain by 3 dB and now the margin is ~7 dB. So usually its pretty close to unstable and at least its always making a noise peak.

That whole TF above a few hundred kHz is weird. We should tune out whatever makes it so flat and also remove the resonance that makes the 1 MHz peak; maybe its from some post mixer low pass?

Anyone interested in helping in the investigation ought to measure the TF of the MC demod board, the MC servo board, and the FSS box.

Silver lining: if we fix this loop shape, we might be able to have a much more stable IMC and IFO.

Attachment 1: MC_OLG.pdf
MC_OLG.pdf
  10235   Fri Jul 18 14:59:07 2014 EvanUpdateIOOMC servo TFs

[Rana, Evan]

This morning we took several TFs of the MC servo board using the HP4395A.

The 4395 source was teed, with one output of the tee going to 4395 R and the other output going to the board's IN1. We then took TFs of (4395 A) / (4395 R), where 4395 A was one of the following four points on the servo board:

  • OUT2
  • A TEST1
  • B TEST1
  • SERVO

For each of these points, we took a TF at two gain settings: IN1 and VCO gains both at 0 dB, and then IN1 and VCO gains both at 20 dB.

Before doing these measurements, we calibrated out the cable delay. Additionally, SERVO was always loaded with 50 Ω—either from the 4395 or from a terminator.

The attached png shows the servo board settings when these TFs were taken with the 0 dB gain settings. The settings for the 20 dB measurements are identical, except for the higher IN1 and VCO gains.

Attachment 1: mcServoTFSettings.png
mcServoTFSettings.png
Attachment 2: MCtfs.pdf
MCtfs.pdf
  10247   Mon Jul 21 13:58:33 2014 ericqUpdateIOOMC autolocker acting up

The autolocker claimed it was running and blinking, but not doing anything (i.e. lock bit was not updating and no switches or sliders being touched)

After stopping and starting it a number of times, it began working again, through no real changes of my own. I'm a little mystified as to what the problem was... keep an eye out.

  10251   Tue Jul 22 08:36:08 2014 EvanUpdateIOOMC servo TFs

Quote:

[Rana, Evan]

This morning we took several TFs of the MC servo board using the HP4395A.

The 4395 source was teed, with one output of the tee going to 4395 R and the other output going to the board's IN1. We then took TFs of (4395 A) / (4395 R), where 4395 A was one of the following four points on the servo board:

  • OUT2
  • A TEST1
  • B TEST1
  • SERVO

For each of these points, we took a TF at two gain settings: IN1 and VCO gains both at 0 dB, and then IN1 and VCO gains both at 20 dB.

Before doing these measurements, we calibrated out the cable delay. Additionally, SERVO was always loaded with 50 Ω—either from the 4395 or from a terminator.

The attached png shows the servo board settings when these TFs were taken with the 0 dB gain settings. The settings for the 20 dB measurements are identical, except for the higher IN1 and VCO gains.

Using the modified schematic (40m:10250), I've made a plot of the TFs I expect for GIN1 = GVCO = 0 dB, taking into account our 50 Ω loading of the board.

Evidently I'm somehow missing a factor of 2 in the gain of the overall TF, but the shapes of the expected vs. measured magnitudes agree quite well.

At 1 MHz, I expect we should have accumulated about 80 degrees of phase going through the servo board. In reality, we appear to have lost more like 105 degrees.

Attachment 1: MCtfExpectations.pdf
MCtfExpectations.pdf
  10303   Thu Jul 31 09:14:14 2014 ericqUpdateIOOMC stability

 Last night, I poked around to try and see if I could reproduce the sketchy MC behavior by exciting MC2 in a way that may be similar to what we do when using it as a CARM actuator. 

The short of it is that at frequencies under 1k, the MC lock didn't mind MC2 position excitations up to 8000 counts. However around 4-5k, a 1000 count excitation would induce a good deal of low frequency (2-5Hz) activity in the MC trans power, causing it to fluctuate by thousands of counts before unlocking. If I turned the excitation off before the unlock, it would eventually settle back down, but not immediately. 

I was able to reproduce this a handful of times before it decided to stop locking altogether, perhaps because of its random mood swings, or perhaps because this kind of disturbance is related to the mood swings...

  10310   Thu Jul 31 19:37:59 2014 KojiUpdateIOOSuccessful modification of the FSS

Quick note:

Migration of the 10Hz pole from the output stage of the FSS to the pomona box was successful.
This also allowed me to insert my offsetting/summing point circuit.

Trial 1:

- Remove C63 (1uF cap) of the FSS

- Short 500 Ohm in the pomona box

This removed 10Hz pole in FSS and 32 Hz zero in the pomona box.
In total we obtain the gain and range of 3.2 for the fast PZT path.

3x10^2 to 3x10^3 times more filtering of the HV amp noise between 10kHz and 100kHz.

The current maximum gains of the FSS is

Overall +19dB (prev. +13dB)
Fast     +30dB (prev +21.5dB)

Trial 2:

- Insert a summing amplifier between the FSS box and the HV amp.

- This amplifier attenuate the input by a factor of 2, and add 5V. i.e. +/-10V input => 0~10V output.

- This just worked fine.

Trial 3:

- Now the fast gain is nominally +30dB.

- In order to provide more room to play with the fast-PC cross over, I moved the pole freq from 2.9Hz to 9.9Hz
  This was done by replacing a 5kOhm in the pomona box by a 1.5kOhm.

Trial 4:

- I just noticed that the output impedance of the FSS (15.8kOhm) and the input impedance of the summing amp (10k Ohm)
  interfere and gives additional 1/2.58 attenuation in addition to the attenuation in the summing amplifier.
  This yields the output range of the HV amp between 45-105V, instead of 0-150V. This is not nice.

- The output impedance of the FSS box (R46 15.8kOhm) was replaced with 100Ohm.

- Now the PMC unlocks very frequently. This might have come from the PMC locking issue or too much gain of the IMC

Trial 5 (final):

- I suspected that the PMC unlock is caused by too much actuation at the high freq. So I decided to revert the  pomona box change

  10314   Thu Jul 31 23:43:00 2014 KojiUpdateIOOModulation frequency adjustment

The main IFO modulation frequency was adjusted to match with the FSR of the IMC.

The new frequency is 11.066128 MHz. This corresponds to the IMC round-trip length of 27.0910 m

This has been done by looking at the peak at 25.845MHz (5* fmod - 29.5MHz) in the MC REFL PD mon.

  10316   Fri Aug 1 01:29:55 2014 KojiUpdateIOOPMC issue

- PMC suddenly refused to lock.

- Investigated what's wrong

- Finally, I touched RF Output Adjust (C1:PSL-PMC_RFADJ). Then it started locking.

- C1:PSL-PMC_RFADJ was set to 2.0 by rana when we looked at the PMC LO issue.
  Now PMC does not lock with this value. I set it to 6.0 so that the lock is robust.

- Right before I lost PMC locking, I had some difficulty in locking IMC. Of course,  the robustness of the PMC is related to the robustness of the IMC.
  We definitely need to investigate this. (RF powers, open loop TF, etc)

  10317   Fri Aug 1 01:57:24 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC auto locker

To make MC auto locker running correctly, mcdown and mcup were revised

I tried it by unlocking MC several times. It seems OK. Let's see how it works.


Nominal gains for locking (to be taken care by mcdown)

C1:IOO-MC_REFL_GAIN
was 16 and is 19 now.

C1:IOO-MC_VCO_GAIN
was 9 and is 9 now too.

C1:PSL-FSS_MGAIN
was missing and now +13

C1:PSL-FSS_FASTGAIN
was +23.5 and is now +20.0

Nominal gains for operation ( to be taken care by mcup.

C1:IOO-MC_REFL_GAIN
was 19 and is 19 now too.

C1:IOO-MC_VCO_GAIN
was 25 and now uses ezcastep (ezcastep C1:IOO-MC_VCO_GAIN=9 +1,16 -s 0.1)

C1:PSL-FSS_MGAIN
C1:PSL-FSS_FASTGAIN

ezcawrite C1:PSL-FSS_MGAIN `ezcaread -n C1:PSL-STAT_FSS_NOM_C_GAIN`
ezcawrite C1:PSL-FSS_FASTGAIN `ezcaread -n C1:PSL-STAT_FSS_NOM_F_GAIN`

 

C1:PSL-STAT_FSS_NOM_C_GAIN`  is +18
C1:PSL-STAT_FSS_NOM_F_GAIN`   is +20

  10319   Fri Aug 1 08:55:34 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC auto locker

It seems that the MC auto locker and the FSSSlow PID servo survived a night.

PC Drive is still angry occasionally. We want to know what this is.

Attachment 1: MC.png
MC.png
  10320   Fri Aug 1 10:40:48 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo summing amp

The summing amp is prepared to allow up to use bipolar full range of the FSS box output

This means that the FSS fast PZT output is now nominally 0V and can range +/-10V.

- FSS Box has the output range of +/-10V

- Thorlabs HV amp MDT694 accepts 0V ~ +10V

- This circuit add an offset of +5V while the main signal is attenuated by a factor of 2. The offset voltage is produced from the voltage reference IC AD586.

- In addition, a summing node and voltage monitors before and after the summing node are provided. They are useful to test the crossover frequency of the fast/PC loops.

- The output noise level at 10kHz was ~60 nV/rtHz. The transfer function of the circuit was measured and flat up to 100kHz. The phase delay is negligible at 10kHz and less than 3deg at 100kHz

- Although the schematic was drawn in Altium, the board is a universal 1U eurocard and all wires were hand soldered.

Attachment 1: Fast_PZT_IF.PDF
Fast_PZT_IF.PDF
  10321   Fri Aug 1 11:11:12 2014 KojiUpdateIOOCurrent IMC servo configuration

The comparison between the new and old MC servo (FSS part) was attached.

- The new servo has the same DC range as before.
  Even though there is 1/2 gain in the chain now, the previous range of the FSS box was 0 to 10V.
  Now it is +/-10V. So we did not lose the range.

- The new servo has x3.2 larger range above 100Hz.

- x1.6 enhancement of the FSS Box output noise above 10Hz.

- The noise of the HV amp (and the summing amp) is x300 and x2600 more filtered at 10kHz and 100kHz respectively.

Attachment 1: diagram.pdf
diagram.pdf
  10322   Fri Aug 1 12:49:06 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

Reasoning to choose the current parameters:

FSS Common: 18dB
FSS Fast: 20dB

Attachment 1:
Openloop transfer function of the IMC loop with the nominal gain setting. The UGF is 176kHz and the phase margin is 48 deg.
This is about 3 time more bandwidth than the previous setting. (Good)

It is visible that the TF has sharp roll off around 1MHz. I wonder if this comes from the demodboard LPF and/or the PMC cav pole.
In fact, according to Manasa, the PMC has the ringdown of 164.6ns which corresponds to the cavity pole of 967kHz. So this must
be there in the OLTF.

From the plot, the order of the low pass is about 5. Subtracting the slope by the cavity pole, the order is four. If I look at the TF of the minicircuits
LPFs (this entry), the phase delay of the filter at 1/10 of the cut off freq is ~30deg. And the order of the filters are maybe 6th elliptic?
So it's not yet clear if the LPF is causing a significant phase delay at 180kHz.

More significantly, the gain margin at ~1MHz is way too small. This is causing a big servo bump at that frequency as seen in Attachment 2.

In total, my recommendation is to move the LPF freq up by x2 or x3, and give a mild LPF above 500kHz.
This requires some modeling as well as try and error.

Attachment 2:

This figure is to explain how the common FSS gain was set. By increasing the gain, the UGF is increased and we can enjoy more supression (from red to purple).
The more gain, however, the more servo bump we observe above the UGF. The gain was chosen so that the total PC feedback does not exceed 3V.

Attachment 3/4:

This figure explains how the fast FSS gain (namely crossover frequency between fast and PC) was set. When the fast is low (red) the phase margin between two loops
are plenty and therefore the openloop TF is smooth. But the PC's frequency domain is large and has to work more (in rms). As the fast gain is increased, the actuation
by the PC is offloaded to the fast PZT (that's good). But eventually the phase margin is not enough and the dip start to show up (purple). This dip cause worse closed loop TF,
as seen in Attachment 4, or even an instability of the loop eventually. So the fast gain was set somewhere in between (green).

Attachment 1: MC_OLTF.pdf
MC_OLTF.pdf
Attachment 2: MC_Error_Common.pdf
MC_Error_Common.pdf
Attachment 3: MC_Crossover.pdf
MC_Crossover.pdf
Attachment 4: MC_CLTF_Fast.pdf
MC_CLTF_Fast.pdf
  10340   Wed Aug 6 17:29:36 2014 JenneUpdateIOOFSS offset changed

The MC has been unstable and unhappy for the last several hours.  When I looked, I saw that the FSS_FAST monitor has been hovering around 1 V, when it is supposed to be closer to 5ish. 

I changed the C1:PSL-FSS_INOFFSET from -0.08 to -0.8537, and will see if the MC sticks around for longer this time around.

  10341   Wed Aug 6 21:22:09 2014 KojiUpdateIOOFSS offset changed

The fast feedback should be around zero now!

  10343   Thu Aug 7 11:57:59 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

LISO Fit for the IMC open loop TF. The data and liso source for the fitting were attached in the ZIP file.

I noticed now that the open loop TF I measured has too less phase delay.
I used the closed loop TF to estimate the openloop TF.

Looking at this comparison, I'm afraid that the superboost was not on during the measurement.
I need a new measurement to design MC loop modification to give the AO path for broader bandwidth.

Attachment 1: MC_OLTF_Fit.pdf
MC_OLTF_Fit.pdf
Attachment 2: IMC_OLTF.zip
Attachment 3: MC_OLTF_estimated.pdf
MC_OLTF_estimated.pdf
  10344   Thu Aug 7 12:25:14 2014 JenneUpdateIOOFSS offset changed

Quote:

The fast feedback should be around zero now!

 Dang it, I completely forgot.  Well, anyhow, it pulled itself back down to less than 1V, and the MC stayed happy for several hours.  I'm not totally sure what changing the offset did, but the MC seems happy for right now.  I should take a quick look at the error point to make sure that I didn't mess up your tuning.

  10351   Fri Aug 8 12:39:19 2014 ericqSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

I have measured the current boosted MC CLG below 100kHz with an SR785. Swept sine only could get me down to 10kHz, but I was able to get down to 5kHz with a noise-injection measurement. 

MCloopAug8.pdf

I am attaching the SR785 outputs, which are in dB and Degrees. Additionally I pruned the areas of bad coherence out of these, and merged them to provide data files for the CLG and OLG in Real,Imaginary format.

Attachment 1: mcLoopAug8.zip
  10354   Fri Aug 8 15:57:29 2014 ericqSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

 I did some further measurements, to try and see what corresponds to what. In the end I performed four measurements:

  1. Closed loop gain measurement on SR785: Source to MC exc, T'd to channel one. Test 2 to channel two.
  2. Open loop gain measurement on SR785: Source to MCexc, Test 2 to channel one, Test 1 to channel two.
  3. Closed loop gain measurement on AG4395: RF Source to MC exc, T'd to R input. Test 2 to A input.
  4. Open loop gain measurement on AG4395: RF Source to MC exc, Test 2 to R input. Test 1 to A input.

I then converted OLGs to CLG and vice-versa with CLG = 1/(1-OLG)

Here are two plots showing the measured and inferred loop TFs for both closed and open. 

OLTFs.pdfCLTFs.pdf

The best agreement seems to be between the directly measured OLGs. Maybe I did something weird with the CLG measurements, or input impedances are distorting things ... 

All data is attached, along with code used to generate the plots. 

Attachment 3: mcLoopAug8.zip
  10356   Fri Aug 8 18:08:12 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

The closed gain I meant is the AO path: Use IN2 to excite the MC loop and measure IN1 using MON2(?).
In order to obtain the open loop gain from this meausrement, the gain mismatching needs to be compensated, though.

This measurement is to correctly predict the AO path response from the open loop transfer function.

Anyway, the openloop gain seems nicely measured. I'll try to predict AO path response from this.

  10359   Sat Aug 9 14:35:28 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC servo analysis

Eric's OLTF turned out consistent with the AO path TF that has been measured by me on Jul 31 (entry 10322).

Attachment 1:
Updated empirical fit of the open loop TF by LISO.
In this fit, I gave some of the poles/zeros associated with the boost manually set so that I can use them for the servo design.
LISO itself can make better fitting if all of the variables are moved.

Atatchment 2:
The OLTF data and LISO source for the fitting.

Attachment 3:
Comparison of the AO path TFs. The red one was measured directly on Jul 31. The TF is normalized at the low frequency.
The blue was estimated from the OLTF model given above. They are well consistent now.

Attachment 4:
Now some servo design was tried. In the new design (blue), zeros of the super boost frequency was moved from 20kHz to 30kHz
with the hope of having flatter AO response. The improvement is very little while costing costing above 100kHz. Note that the vertical
axis is intentionally in a linear scale. In fact, the AO response is much improved compared to the one before the MC UGF was increased
(shown in magenta). We have a flatter response both in magnitude and phase.
Therefore I think there is no need to tweak the boost frequency for the AO path.
I'd rather recommend to inspect the high frequency LPFs to earn more gain margin at 1MHz as
explained in entry 10322.

Attachment 5:
This figure shows the comparison of the TFs for the current and new design trial, just in case someone is interested in to see.

 

Attachment 1: MC_OLTF_Fit.pdf
MC_OLTF_Fit.pdf
Attachment 2: liso.zip
Attachment 3: MC_CLTF_Fit.pdf
MC_CLTF_Fit.pdf
Attachment 4: MC_CLTF_new.pdf
MC_CLTF_new.pdf
Attachment 5: MC_OLTF_new.pdf
MC_OLTF_new.pdf
  10363   Mon Aug 11 21:03:48 2014 ericq, ranaSummaryIOOMC demod measurement

We measured the TF of the MC Demod board today.

We set the Marconi to +3dBm and drove the PD IN port of the demod board, starting at 29.5 MHz. Then we looked at the beat signal amplitude in the output of the demod board. So this is a transfer function but with mag only. Plots from Q below.

Rana took the demod board out and took pictures of it. Inside, the post mixer low pass is a SCLF-5 from mini-circuits. This has a lot of cutoff down low. Since the purpose of this filter is only to cutoff the 2f-1f and the 3f-2f products, we need to have a lot of attenuation at 29.5 MHz. One day, we may want to re-instate that notch for the (3*f1- f_MC) beat frequency, but for now we want stability.

So, I recommend that we (Steve) get 3 each of the SCLF-10 and SCLF-10.7 from Mini-Circuits Tuesday morning. Maybe we can put them into a spare board?

Also, we should probably remove the 140kHz:70kHz lead filter which is in the MC servo board. Its out of date. I think it would be fine for us to get a 7-15 kHz UGF for the CM servo and the MC can basically do that already. Mainly we want to fix the high frequency shape to get more stability.

After the measurements and photos, we had to reset the MCWFS offsets to get the WFS to not break the lock. Seems very sensitive to offsets. Hopefully Andres will give us a new Gouy phase telescope.

  10364   Mon Aug 11 22:07:31 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMC demod measurement

SCLF-5!? It's surprising as the cut off of the OLTF is just above 1Hz. cf this entry

This means that not the demod board but MC or FSS boards seem to have large attenuation above 1MHz.

In this situation, does SCLF-10/10.7 really help us?

  10365   Mon Aug 11 23:32:54 2014 ericqSummaryIOOMC demod measurement

Here's the magnitude plot of the board TF. As mentioned above, this was done with Marconi+Scope, so we were not able to get the phase of this transfer function. 

MCDemod.pdf

Oddly enough, the bump that I saw is not included in Minicircuit's data on the SCLF-5.

Attachment 2: demodLP.txt
# F(Hz) RMS(mV)
1035 38.6
2031 38.47
4031 38.47
8032 38.38
16030 38.10
32030 38.10
64030 38.16
128000 38.10
256000 38.22
... 12 more lines ...
  10370   Tue Aug 12 18:20:13 2014 ericqUpdateIOOFSS box TFs

I made some measurements of the FSS box today, to have TFs for a loop model, but also to see what the difference between the different inputs was. 

As a reminder, the FSS box takes the error signal from the MC servo, does some filtering, and sends out two outputs: one to the laser PZT via KojiBox and Thorlabs HV amplifier, and one to be summed with the PMC modulation signal to the PC. Rana found the schematic at D040105

The MC error signal currently enters via a port called "IN1", but there is also a "Test 1 in," which experiences different filtering. I measured the TFs from each of these inputs to both the FAST and PC outputs. There is also an IN2, that is added after the offset point, but was not able to make a good measurement, for reasons unknown. From these TFs, I inferred the difference between the PC and FAST path, as well as the difference between IN1 and Test 1 in.

Specifically, I plugged the cable that is usually connected to the MC servo output, labelled "TO FSS BOX", into the RF out of the AG4395. I then took a BNC cable from the FAST out, or PC out, and fed it into a mini circuits DC block (BLK-89-S+), and then into input A, after checking on a scope that the signal was roughly zeroed and not too huge. Unbeknownst to me at the time, the PC drive output can be pretty big, and could potentially fry the analyzer's input. Fortunately, I think I avoided this fate. 

FSSbox.pdfFSSfilt.pdf

A ~1.3 MHz bump can be seen here, which would conspire with the bump in the demod board I measured yesterday, to steal even more phase around 1MHz. Maybe we can modify the FSS box to help our gain peaking situation out. 

The data is attached.

RXA: Shazam!

Attachment 3: FSSdata.zip
  10380   Wed Aug 13 23:08:17 2014 ranaUpdateIOOFSS box TFs

As EQ pointed out recently, we're injecting into the FSS error point just after an RF pi filter, but before the VGA. We wondered what the weird filter impedance was doing to our signal if we inject after it. I used LISO to model this FSS common section and attach the plots.

The first plot shows the TF between the Test 1 input and the AD602 VGA input. This is NOT the input that we are actually using.

The second plot shows the TF between the IN1 port (which we are actually using) and the VGA input.

Neither of them shows the 1 MHz bump that we see in the measurements, so I suspect that the board has been modified...the hunt continues. We've got to pop the top of the TTFSS and take photos and measure from IN1 to VGA input.

** FSScomm.fil is now in the LISO SVN. The following command line will run it with two different cases and cat the PDF files into one. If you use an auto-refresh PDF viewer like Okular or Mac Preview, its a nicer display than the usual GNUplot window:

./mfil FSScomm.fil; sleep 1; pdftk FSScomm_run*.pdf cat output FSScomm.pdf

Attachment 1: FSScomm.pdf
FSScomm.pdf FSScomm.pdf
  10391   Thu Aug 14 19:23:25 2014 ranaHowToIOOHow do I set the FSS offset to make the PZT voltage start at the right place?

 When the IMC locks, we want the FAST OUT of the TTFSS box to be close to zero volts. We also want the control signal from the MC Servo board to be close to 0 V. How to set this up?

With the IMC locked, we just servo the FSS input offset to minimize the MC board output :

ezcaservo -r C1:IOO-MC_FAST_MON -g 0.1 -t 10 C1:PSL-FSS_INOFFSET

I would have used "CDSUTILS", but that seems to have some sort of ridiculous bug where we can't have prefixes on channel names, even on the command line. 

  10392   Thu Aug 14 19:33:00 2014 JenneConfigurationIOOMoved MC2 spot

Last night, and again just now, I used the ./MC2_spot_[direction] scripts to center the MC2 spot on the trans QPD.  The MCWFS handled overall alignment to correct for the fact that the ratios in the script aren't perfect.  When I was finished, I ran the MC WFS relief script from the WFS screen.  Last night, and again today, things had drifted until the yaw spot was more than 0.5 counts off.

  10406   Mon Aug 18 09:42:50 2014 KojiSummaryIOOMCREFL PD charcterization

Riju did the measurement of the MCREFL PD.
I found data files in her directory on the control machine.

I was not sure how much was the transimpedance of the DC out.
I assumed the default number from the circuit diagram which was 66.7Ohm.
This may cause the error in absolute caribration of the transimpedance but the shape does not change.

The RF preamp is gain-peeking at 250MHz.

Here is further characterization of the PD response.
As you can see in the second attachment, the 3dB cut off of the resonance is about 2.3MHz.

The game plan file in dropbox was also modified.

Attachment 1: MCREFLPD_transimpedance.pdf
MCREFLPD_transimpedance.pdf
Attachment 2: MCREFLPD_transimpedance_zoom.pdf
MCREFLPD_transimpedance_zoom.pdf
  10424   Fri Aug 22 15:11:55 2014 andres, nicolasSummaryIOOMC WFS activity

1. Before doing anything, we centered the IOO QPDs.
2. With the WFS enabled, we offloaded the control signals onto the bias sliders. Then we saved the slider values. The MC LSC diode had a DC value of ~0.5
3. Turned down power with half wave plate before PMC.  Power injected to vacuum ~ 100mW.
4. We did a beam scan of MC REFL, it looks smaller than what Andres predicted based on the MC eigenmode by 10-20%.
5. We made many changes on the table, pictures to be added by Andres.
6. We didn't have the 80% reflector we wanted to increase the WFS power, so it's still a 98%.
6. Beams were aligned on MC REFL PL, camera, beam dumps, WFSs.
7. Clean up
8. PSL power increased to 1.2W, MC locked right away.
9 We didn't change the IOO WFS output matrix, but we changed some signs and gains to make everything stable. MC autolocker brings it back from cold just fine.
10. All time bombs that we've left will be E.Q.'s to clean up. Sorry.\
11. Yay

  10425   Fri Aug 22 15:58:02 2014 SteveSummaryIOOMC WFS activity

 

 

Attachment 1: GoyphaseSet.png
GoyphaseSet.png
  10561   Thu Oct 2 20:54:45 2014 KojiUpdateIOOIMC WFS measurements

[Eric Koji]

We made sensing matrix measurements for the IMC WFS and the MC2 QPD.

The data is under further analysis but here is some record of the current state to show
IMC Trans RIN and the ASC error signals with/without IMC ASC loops

The measureents were done automatically running DTT. This can be done by

/users/Templates/MC/wfsTFs/run_measurements

The analysis is in preparation so that it provides us a diagnostic report in a PDF file.

Attachment 1: IMC_RIN_141002.pdf
IMC_RIN_141002.pdf
Attachment 2: IMC_WFS_141002.pdf
IMC_WFS_141002.pdf
  10564   Fri Oct 3 13:03:05 2014 ericqUpdateIOOIMC WFS measurements

Yesterday, Koji and I measured the transfer function of pitch and yaw excitations of each MC mirror, directly to each quadrant of each WFS QPD. 

When I last touched the WFS settings, I only used MC2 excitations to set the individual quadrant demodulation phases, but Koji pointed out that this could be incomplete, since motion of the curved MC2 mirror is qualitatively different than motion of the flat 1&3. 

We set up a DTT file with twenty TFs (the excitation to I & Q of each WFS quadrant, and the MC2 trans quadrants), and then used some perl find and replace magic to create an xml file for each excitation. These are the files called by the measurement script Koji wrote. 

I then wrote a MATLAB script that uses the magical new dttData function Koji and Nic have created, to extract the TF data at the excitation frequency, and build up the sensing elements. I broke the measurements down by detector and excitation coordinate (pitch or yaw).

The amplitudes of the sensing elements in the following plots are normalized to the single largest response of any of the QPD's quadrants to an excitation in the given coordinate, the angles are unchanged. From this, we should be able to read off the proper digital demodulation angles for each segment, confirm the signs of their combinations for pitch and yaw, and construct the sensing matrix elements of the properly rotated signals. 

WFS1PIT.pdfWFS2PIT.pdf

WFS1YAW.pdfWFS2YAW.pdf

The axes of each quadrant look consistent across mirrors, which is good, as it nails down the proper demod angle. 

The xml files and matlab script used to generate these plots is attached. (It requires the dttData functions however, which are in the svn (and the dttData functions require a MATLAB newer than 2012b))

Attachment 5: analyzeWfs.zip
  10565   Sun Oct 5 10:09:49 2014 ranaUpdateIOOIMC WFS measurements

It seems clever, but I wonder why use DTT and command line perl, instead of using the FE lockins or just demod the offline data or all of the other sensing matrix scripts made for the LSC (at 40m) or ASC (at LLO) ?

  10566   Sun Oct 5 23:43:08 2014 KojiUpdateIOOIMC WFS measurements

There are several non scientific reasons.

  10646   Tue Oct 28 14:07:28 2014 KojiUpdateIOOIMC WFS sensing matrix measurement

Last night the sensing matrix for IMC WFS&QPD were measured.

C1:IOO-MC(1, 2, 3)_(ASCPIT, ASCYAW)_EXC were excited at 5.01Hz with 100 count
The output of the WFS1/WFS2/QPD were measured. They all looked well responding
i.e. Pitch motion shows pitch error signals, Yaw motion shows yaw error signals.

The below is the transfer function from each suspension to the error signals

MC1P      MC2P     MC3P
-3.16e-4  1.14e-2  4.62e-3 -> WFS1P
 5.43e-3  8.22e-3 -2.79e-3 -> WFS2P
-4.03e-5 -3.98e-5 -3.94e-5 -> QPDP

MC1Y      MC2Y     MC3Y
-6.17e-4  6.03e-4  1.45e-4 -> WFS1Y
-2.43e-4  4.57e-3 -2.16e-3 -> WFS2Y
 7.08e-7  2.40e-6  1.32e-6 -> QPDY

Taking the inverse of these matrices, the scale was adjusted so that the dc response.

Attachment 1: 00.png
00.png
  10647   Tue Oct 28 15:27:25 2014 ericqUpdateIOOIMC WFS sensing matrix measurement

 I took some spectra of the error signals and MC2 Trans RIN with the loops off (blue) and on (red) during the current conditions of daytime seismic noise.

45.png

 

ELOG V3.1.3-