40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 277 of 337  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Dateup Author Type Category Subject
  13903   Thu May 31 15:48:16 2018 KiraUpdatePEMrunning PID script with seismometer

I have attached the result of running the PID script on the seismometer with the can on. The daily fluctuations are no more than 0.07 degrees off from the setpoint of 39 degrees. Not really sure what happened in the past day to cause the strange behavior. It seems to have returned back to normal today.

Attachment 1: can-on-pid.png
can-on-pid.png
  13904   Thu May 31 17:47:12 2018 KojiUpdateComputersmegatron process cleaning up

megatron had full of zombie medm processes due to some of the screenshot scripts.

I also found that apache2 is running on megatron without any configuration. I just disable it by

sudo update-rc.d apache2 disable

  13905   Thu May 31 19:51:06 2018 KojiUpdateGeneralWiFi router firmware update / rebooting

The model of our martian wifi router (NETGEAR R6400) was found in the FBI router list to be rebooted asociated with the malware "VPNFilter" issue.

I checked the attached devices and found bunch of (legit) devices blocked to access the wifi router. This is not an immediate problem as most of the packets do not go through the wifi router. But potentially a problem in some cases like Wifi enables GPIB adapters. So I marked them to be "allowed".

In this opprtunity, I have updated the firmware of the wifi router and this naturally involved rebooting of the device.

 

  13906   Thu May 31 22:59:27 2018 KojiConfigurationComputersShorewall on nodus

[Jonathan Koji]

Shorewall (http://shorewall.net/), a tool to configure iptables, was installed on nodus.
The description about shorewall setting on nodus can be found here: https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/NodusShorewallSetting

NDS (31200) on megatoron is not enabled outside of the firewall yet.

  13907   Thu May 31 23:12:17 2018 gautamUpdateLSCDRMI locking attempt

Summary:

I wanted to recover the DRMI locking. Among other things, Jon mentioned that his mode spectroscopy can be done in the DRMI config. But I was foiled last night by a rogue waveplate in the AS beampath, and today evening, I noticed the resurfacing of this problem. Clearly, this is indicative of some issue in the analog whitening electronics, as the DC light level on the AS55 PD is consistent with previous measurements. Moreover, last time, the problem "fixed itself" so I don't know what exactly the problem was in the first place. I'll try doing the same test in the linked elog tomorrow. As a quick test, I cycled through the whitening gains (0-45dB) to see if it was some stuck ADC register, but that didn't fix the problem.

The problem seems to be with REFL55 only - I am able to lock the PRMI with carrier resonant without any issues, and the error signal levels are consistent with what I remember them being while the PRMI is swinging around. AS55 lives on the same whitening board and doesn't seem to suffer from the same probelms.


Decided to do the check tonight, but as Attachment #1 shows, no real red flags from the whitening gain side.

Attachment 1: REFL55_whtCheck.pdf
REFL55_whtCheck.pdf
  13908   Fri Jun 1 01:22:50 2018 gautamUpdateLSCDRMI locking restored

As it happened last time, the problem apparently fixed itself - somehow the act of me disconnecting the cables and reconnecting them seems to solve the problem, need to think about this.

Anyway, DRMI was locked a few times tonightyes. I got in a good long stretch where I ran some sensing lines and collected some data, analysis tomorrow. I am going to center the vertex oplevs as an alignment reference for now. A major source of lockloss seems to be angular instability - see for example this video grab of POP:

Could be due to noise injection from the noisy PRM Oplev HeNe, or just TT mirror angular motion (I couldn't get the PRC angular FF going tonight).

Attachment 1: DRMI_20180531.png
DRMI_20180531.png
  13909   Fri Jun 1 19:25:11 2018 poojaUpdateCamerasSynchronizing video data with the applied motion to the mirror

Aim: To synchronize data from the captured video and the signal applied to ETMX

In order to correlate the intensity fluctuations of the scattered light with the motion of the test mass, we are planning to use the technique of neural network. For this, we need a synchronised video of scattered light with the signal applied to the test mass. Gautam helped me capture 60sec video of scattering of infrared laser light after ETMX was dithered in PITCH at ~0.2Hz..

I developed a python program to capture the video and convert it into a time series of the sum of pixel values in each frame using OpenCV to see the variation. Initially we had tried the same with green laser light and signal of approximately 11.12Hz. But in order to see the variation clearly, we repeated with a lower frequency signal after locking IR laser today. I have attached the plots that we got below. The first graph gives the intensity fluctuations from the video. The third and fourth graphs are that of transmitted light and the signal applied to ETMX to shake it. Since the video captured using the camera was very noisy and intensity fluctuations in the scattered light had twice the frequency of the signal applied, we captured a video after turning off the laser. The second plot gives the background noise probably from the camera. Since camera noise is very high, it may not be possible to train this data set in neural network.

Since the videos captured consume a lot of memory I haven't uploaded it here. I have uploaded the python code 'sync_plots.py' in github (https://github.com/CaltechExperimentalGravity/GigEcamera/tree/master/Pooja%20Sekhar/PythonCode).

 

Attachment 1: camera_mirror_motion_plots.pdf
camera_mirror_motion_plots.pdf
  13910   Fri Jun 1 21:47:23 2018 KojiFrogsGeneralTouch screen manipulation of the IFO

[Koji Gautam]

We talked about touch interface of medm. We realized that android (and iOS) has vnc clients. I just installed VNC viewer on my phone and connected to my mac. Typing is tricky but I managed to get into pianosa, then launched sitemap. We could unlock/lock the IMC by screen touch!

Basically we can connect to one of the laptops (or control machines) from a tablet (either android or ipad). It'd be better to put both in a same network. It'd be great if we have a tablet case with a keyboard so that we can type without blocking the screen.

Attachment 1: Screenshot_20180601-214459.png
Screenshot_20180601-214459.png
  13911   Sun Jun 3 22:48:59 2018 johannesUpdatePSLaux laser replacement

I brought the NPRO from the Crackle experiment over to the 40m Lab and set it up on the PSL table to replace the slowly dying AUX laser. I also brought along a Faraday isolator, broadband EOM, and an ISOMET AOM with driver electronics from the optics storage in the Crackle Lab.

This laser is a much newer model, made in 2008, and still has all its mojo, but we should probably keep up the practice of turning it off when it's not going to be used for a while. I measured 320 mW leaving the laser, and 299mW of that going through the Faraday isolator, whose Brewster-angle polarizer I had to clean because they were a little dusty. While the laser output is going strong, the controller displays a power output of only 10 mW, which makes me think that the power monitoring PD is busted. This is a completely different failure mode from what we've seen with the other NPROs that we can hopefully get repaired at some point, particularly because the laser is newer, but for now it's installed on the PSL table. This likely means that the noise eater isn't working on this unit either, for different reasons, but at least we have plenty of optical power.

The setup is very similar to before, with the addition of a Faraday isolator and a broadband EOM, in case we decide to get more bandwidth in the PLL. I changed the Crystal Technologies 3200-113 200 MHz AOM for an ISOMET 80 MHz AOM with RF driver from the Crackle lab's optics storage and sized the AUX beam to a diameter of 200 micron. I couldn't locate an appropriate heat sink for the driver, which is still in factory condiction, but since the PSL AOM also runs on 80MHz I used that one instead. The two AOMs saturate at different RF powers, so care must be taken to not drive the AUX AOM too high. At 600 mV input to the driver the deflection into the first order was maximal at 73 % of the input power, with the second order beam and the first order on the other side cleary visible.

In order to speed things up I didn't spend too much time on mode-matching, but the advantage of the fiber setup is that we can always improve later if need be without affecting things downstream. I coupled the first order beam into the fiber to the AS table with 58% efficiency, and restored the beat with the PSL laser on the NewFocus 1611. The contrast there is only about 20%, netting a -20 dBm beat note. This is only a marginal improvement from before, so the PLL will work as usual, but if we get the visibility up a little in the future we won't need to amplify the PD signal for the PLL anymore.

Some more things I wanted to do but didn't get to today are

  • Measure intensity noise of aux laser
  • Measure rise and fall times of new AOM
  • Get PLL back up and running
  • Place 90/10 beamsplitter in AS path and couple IFO output into fiber (= couple fiber output into IFO)

I'll resume this work tomorrow. I turned the aux laser and the AOM driver input off. For the PSL beat the AOM drive is not needed, and the power in the optical fiber should not exceed 100 mW, so the offset voltage to the AOM RF driver has to remain below 300 mV.

  13912   Mon Jun 4 02:52:52 2018 johannesUpdatePSLaux laser replacement

> While the laser output is going strong, the controller displays a power output of only 10 mW, which makes me think that the power monitoring PD is busted.

NPRO internal power monitor often shows smaller value than the actual due to a broken PD or misalignment. I don't think we need to fix it.

STEVE: Aux Lightwave M126-1064-200, sn259 [July 2009] 1.76A, ADJ 9,  9mW on it's display should not mislead you. It's output  320mW

Quote:

I brought the NPRO from the Crackle experiment over to the 40m Lab and set it up on the PSL table to replace the slowly dying AUX laser. I also brought along a Faraday isolator, broadband EOM, and an ISOMET AOM with driver electronics from the optics storage in the Crackle Lab.

This laser is a much newer model, made in 2008, and still has all its mojo, but we should probably keep up the practice of turning it off when it's not going to be used for a while. I measured 320 mW leaving the laser, and 299mW of that going through the Faraday isolator, whose Brewster-angle polarizer I had to clean because they were a little dusty. While the laser output is going strong, the controller displays a power output of only 10 mW, which makes me think that the power monitoring PD is busted. This is a completely different failure mode from what we've seen with the other NPROs that we can hopefully get repaired at some point, particularly because the laser is newer, but for now it's installed on the PSL table. This likely means that the noise eater isn't working on this unit either, for different reasons, but at least we have plenty of optical power.

The setup is very similar to before, with the addition of a Faraday isolator and a broadband EOM, in case we decide to get more bandwidth in the PLL. I changed the Crystal Technologies 3200-113 200 MHz AOM for an ISOMET 80 MHz AOM with RF driver from the Crackle lab's optics storage and sized the AUX beam to a diameter of 200 micron. I couldn't locate an appropriate heat sink for the driver, which is still in factory condiction, but since the PSL AOM also runs on 80MHz I used that one instead. The two AOMs saturate at different RF powers, so care must be taken to not drive the AUX AOM too high. At 600 mV input to the driver the deflection into the first order was maximal at 73 % of the input power, with the second order beam and the first order on the other side cleary visible.

In order to speed things up I didn't spend too much time on mode-matching, but the advantage of the fiber setup is that we can always improve later if need be without affecting things downstream. I coupled the first order beam into the fiber to the AS table with 58% efficiency, and restored the beat with the PSL laser on the NewFocus 1611. The contrast there is only about 20%, netting a -20 dBm beat note. This is only a marginal improvement from before, so the PLL will work as usual, but if we get the visibility up a little in the future we won't need to amplify the PD signal for the PLL anymore.

Some more things I wanted to do but didn't get to today are

  • Measure intensity noise of aux laser
  • Measure rise and fall times of new AOM
  • Get PLL back up and running
  • Place 90/10 beamsplitter in AS path and couple IFO output into fiber (= couple fiber output into IFO)

I'll resume this work tomorrow. I turned the aux laser and the AOM driver input off. For the PSL beat the AOM drive is not needed, and the power in the optical fiber should not exceed 100 mW, so the offset voltage to the AOM RF driver has to remain below 300 mV.

 

  13913   Mon Jun 4 11:00:37 2018 gautamUpdatePSLaux laser replacement
Quote:

I couldn't locate an appropriate heat sink for the driver, which is still in factory condiction, but since the PSL AOM also runs on 80MHz I used that one instead.

We have the appropriate heatsink - I'd like to minimize interference with the main beam wherever possible.

Quote:

For the PSL beat the AOM drive is not needed, and the power in the optical fiber should not exceed 100 mW, so the offset voltage to the AOM RF driver has to remain below 300 mV.

If damage to the fiber is a concern, I think it's better to use a PBS + waveplate to attenuate the power going into the fiber. When the AOM switching is hooked up to CDS, it's easy to imagine a wrong button being pressed or a wrong value being typed in.

It would probably also be good to have a pickoff monitor for the NPRO DC power so that we can confirm its health (in the short run, we can hijack a PSL Acromag channel for this purpose, as we now do for FSS_RMTEMP). I don't know that we need an EOM for the PLL, as in order to get that going, we probably need some fast electronics for the EOM path, like an FSS box. 

STEVE: I ordered the right heatsink for the acousto after Koji pointed out that the vertical fins are 20% more efficient. Why? Because hot air rises. It will be here in 3-4 days.

  13914   Mon Jun 4 11:34:05 2018 Jon RichardsonUpdateCamerasUpdate on GigE Cameras

I spent a day trying to modify Joe B.'s LLO camera client-server code without ultimate success. His codes now runs without throwing any errors, but something inside the black-box handoff of his camera source code to gstreamer appears to be SILENTLY FAILING. Gautam suggested a call with Joe B., which I think is worth a try.

In the meantime, I've impemented a simple Python video feed streamer which does work, and which students can use as a base framework to implement more complicated things (e.g., stream multiple feeds in one window, save a video stream movie or animation).

It uses the same PyPylon API to interface with the GigE cameras as does Joe's code. However, it uses matplotlib instead of gstreamer to render the imaging. The matplotlib code is optimized for maximum refresh rate and I observed it to achieve ~5 Hz for a single video feed. However, this demo code does not set any custom cameras settings (it just initializes a camera with its defaults), so it's quite possible that the refresh rate is actually limited by, e.g., the camera exposure time.

Location of the code (on the shared network drive):

/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/GigE/demo_with_mpl/stream_camera_to_mpl.py

This demo initializes a single GigE camera with its default settings and continuously streams its video feed in a pop-up window. It runs continuously until the window is closed. I installed PyPylon from source on the SL7 machine (rossa) and have only tested it on that machine. I believe it should work on all our versions of Linux, but if not, run the camera software on rossa for now.

Usage:

From within the above directory, the code is executed as 

$python stream_camera_to_mpl.py [Camera IP address]

with a single argument specifying the IP address of the desired camera. At the time I tested, there was only one GigE camera on our network, at 192.168.113.152.

  13915   Mon Jun 4 19:41:01 2018 keerthanaUpdate Finesse code for cavity scan

The cavity scan data obtained from the Finesse simulation is attached here. Fig1 indicates the cavity scan data in the absence of induced misalignment. In that case only the fundemental mode is resonating. But when a misalignment is induced, higher order modes are also present as seen in Fig2. This is in the absence of surface figure error in the mirrors. Now I am trying to provide perturbations to the mirror surface in the form of zernike polynomials and get the scan data fom the simulation. These cavity scan data can be used to develop fitting models. Once we have a model, we can use it to analyse the data from the experimental cavity scan.

Attachment 1: Fig1.png
Fig1.png
Attachment 2: Fig2.png
Fig2.png
  13916   Tue Jun 5 02:06:59 2018 gautamUpdatePSLaux laser first (NULL) results

[johannes, gautam]

  1. Johannes aligned the single bounce off the ITM into the AUX fiber on the AS table, and also the AUX beam into the fiber on the PSL table.
    • Mode matching isn't spectaular anywhere in this chain.
    • But we have 2.6mW of light going into the SRM with the AOM deflection into the 1st order beam (which is what we send into the IFO) maximum.
  2. We set up some remote capabilities for the PLL and Marconi frequency (=PLL setpoint) control.
  3. Motivation was to try and lock DRMI, and look for some resonance of the AUX beam in the SRC.
    • We soon realized this was a way too lofty goal.
    • So we decided to try the simpler system of PRMI locked on carrier.
    • We were successfully able to sweep the Marconi setpoint in up to 20kHz steps (although we can only move the setpoint in one direction, not sure I know why now).
    • Then we decided to look for resonances of the AUX beam in the arm cavity.
    • Still no cigar broken heart
  4. Plus points:
    • PLL can be reliably locked remotely.
    • Marconi freq. can be swept deterministically remotely.
  5. Tomorrow:
    • Fix polarization issues. There is some low freq drift (~5min period) of the power incident on the fiber on the PSL table which we don't understand.
    • Verify MM into IFO and also into fiber at PSL table.
    • Do mode spectroscopy.

I was wondering why the PMC modulation sidebands are showing up on the control room analyzer with ~6dB difference in amplitude. Then I realized that it is reasonable for the cabling to have 6dB higher loss at 80 MHz compared to 20 MHz.

  13917   Tue Jun 5 20:31:42 2018 ranaUpdateCamerasUpdate on GigE Cameras

Aha! Video is back!

I think it would be good to add a flag whereby the video can be saved to disk in some uncompressed video format (ogg, avi, ?) instead of displayed to a matplotlib window. We could then use the default to just display video, but use the save-to-disk flag to grab a few minutes of video for image processing.

Quote:

In the meantime, I've impemented a simple Python video feed streamer which does work, and which students can use as a base framework to implement more complicated things (e.g., stream multiple feeds in one window, save a video stream movie or animation).

  13918   Wed Jun 6 10:02:52 2018 SteveUpdateVACRGA scan
Attachment 1: RGA302d.png
RGA302d.png
Attachment 2: annuloses_NOT_pumped.png
annuloses_NOT_pumped.png
Attachment 3: temp_vac.png
temp_vac.png
  13919   Wed Jun 6 10:44:52 2018 gautamUpdateVACAnnulus pressure channels added to frames

[steve, gautam]

We added the following channels to C0EDCU.ini and restarted the daqd processes. Channels seem to have been added successfully, we will check trend writing later today. Motivation is to have a long term record of annulus pressure (even though we are not currently pumping on the annulus).

C1:Vac-PASE_status

C1:Vac-PASV_status

C1:Vac-PABS_status

C1:Vac-PAEV_status

C1:Vac-PAEE_status

plot next day

Attachment 1: AnsPressureLogged.png
AnsPressureLogged.png
  13920   Wed Jun 6 14:36:15 2018 gautamUpdateLSCTRX clipping

For some time now, I've been puzzled by the unreliability of the ASS_X dither alignment servo. Leaving the servo on, TRX often begins to decay to a lower value, and even after freezing the dither at the maximum TRX values, I can manually align the mirrors to increase TRX. We have suspected some kind of clipping in the TRX path that is responsible for this behaviour. Today I decided to investigate this a bit further. To have the arm locked and to inspect the beam, we have to change the locking trigger - TRX is what is normally used, but I misaligned the Y arm completely, and used AS110 as a trigger instead. There is some strangeness in the triggering topology, but this deserves a separate elog.

Once the arm was locked (and relocks using the AS110 trigger in the event of an unlock), I was able to trace the beampath on the EX table with an IR card. The TRX beam is rather large and weak, so it is hard to see, but as best as I can tell, the only real danger of clipping (or perhaps the beam is already clipped) is on the final steering mirror before the beam hits the (Thorlabs) PD. Steve/Pooja are working on getting a photo of this, and will upload it here shortly. Options to mitigate this:

  1. Use the harmonic separator to steer the beam lower, and center it on the 1" steering mirror. However, this could possibly lead to clipping on some of the upstream lenses.
  2. Raise the height of the 1" steering mirror by 0.25". However, this would require a custom 3/4" dia post height or some shims, which I am not sure is in line with our optomechanic mounting practises.
  3. Use a 2" mirror instead of a 1" mirror.

The EX QPD has stopped working since the Acromag install. If it were working, we wouldn't have to rely on the alternate triggering with AS110 and instead just use the QPD as TRX, while we debug the Thorlabs PD path.

  13921   Wed Jun 6 14:50:25 2018 gautamUpdateGeneralLSC triggering

I though that the "C1LSC_TRIG_MTRX" MEDM screen completely controls the triggring of LSC signals. But today while trying to trigger the X-arm locking servo on AS110 instead of TRX, I found some strange behaviour. Summary of important points:

  1. Even though the servo was supposed to be triggered on AS110, the act of me blocking the beam on the EX table destroyed the lock. I verified the correlation between me blocking the beam and the lock being destroyed by repeating the blocking at least 10 times at different locations along the beam path (to make sure I wasn't accidentally clipping the Oplev beam for example).
  2. Investigating further, I found that me turning off the TRX signal digitally also deterministically led to the X arm lock being lost. To be clear, the TRX DC element in the trigger matrix was 0.
  3. Confirmed that TRX wasn't involved in any way in the locking servo (I was checking for normalization of the PDH error signal by the DC transmission value, but this is not done). To do this, I locked the arm, and then turned all elements corresponding to TRX in the PowNorm matrix to 0. Then I disabled the locking servo and re-enabled it, and the lock was readily re-acquired readily.

All very strange, not sure what's going on here. The simulink model diagram also didn't give me any clues. Need's further investigation.

Attachment 1: LSC_TRIG.png
LSC_TRIG.png
  13922   Wed Jun 6 15:12:29 2018 KiraUpdatePEMparts from lab

Got this 1U box from the Y arm that we could potentially use (attachment 1). It doesn't have handles on the front but I guess we could attach them if necessary. Attachment 2 is a switch that could be used instead of a light up switch, but now we need to add LEDs on the front panel that indicate that the switch is functional. Attachment 3 is a terminal block that we can use to attach the 16 gage wire to since it is thick and attaching it directly to the board would be difficult. If this is alright to use then I'll change up my designs for the front panel and PCB to accomodate these parts.

Attachment 1: IMG_20180606_141149.jpg
IMG_20180606_141149.jpg
Attachment 2: IMG_20180606_141851.jpg
IMG_20180606_141851.jpg
Attachment 3: IMG_20180606_141912.jpg
IMG_20180606_141912.jpg
  13923   Wed Jun 6 17:22:23 2018 KojiBureaucracyGeneralSalvaged junk from yend

While Keerthana and johannes were working at the end, I made a little cleaning at the yend. I salvaged large amount of hardware inclding optics, optomechanics. We all together should work on returning them to appropriate locations.

Attachment 1: DSC_0661.JPG
DSC_0661.JPG
  13924   Thu Jun 7 10:26:36 2018 keerthanaUpdatePSLobserving the resonance signal corresponding to the injected frequency.

(Johannes, Koji, Keerthana)

The PLL loop ensures that the frequency difference between the PSL laser and the AUX laser is equal to the frequency we provide to the Local Oscillator (LO) with the help of a Marconi. Only a small pick off part of both the AUX and PSL lasers are going to the PLL loop. The other part of both the lasers are going to the interferometer. Before entering into the optical fibre, the AUX laser passes through an AOM which changes its frequency by an amount of 80MHz. When the PLL is locked, the frequency coming out of the PLL will be equal to the frequency set up in the Marconi (fm). When it passes through AOM, the frequency becomes fdiff = fm ±80 MHz. If this frequency beam and the PSL laser beam is aligned properly, and if this frequency is equal to the product of an integer and the free spectral range of the cavity, this will resonate in the cavity.  Then we expect to get a peak in the ETM transmission spectrum corresponding to the frequency we injected through the optical Fibre.

Through out the experiment we need to make sure that the PSL is locked. Thus, the signal detected by the photo detector when only PSL is resonating inside the cavity, act as a DC signal. Then we give a narrow scan to the Marconi. When fdiff = N*FSRy this condition is satisfied, we will observe a peak in the output. Here FSRy  is the free spectral range of the cavity which is approximately equal to 3.893 MHz.

Yesterday afternoon, Johannes, Koji and myself tried to observe this peak. We aligned the cavity by observing the output signal from the AS100 photo detector. We made the alignment in such a way that the intensity output getting from this photo detector is maximum. We used a Spectrum analyser to see the output. After that we connected a photo detector to collect the YEND transmission signal from the ETM mirror. We used a lens to focus this directly to the photodetector. Then we connected this photodetector to the spectrum analyser, which was located near the AS table. We took a large cable to meet this purpose. But still the cable was not lengthy enough, so we joined it with another cable and finally connected it with the spectrum analyser. Then we gave a scan to the Marconi from 51 MHZ to 55 MHz. We repeated this experiment with a scan of 55 MHz to 59 MHz also. We repeated this a few times, but we were not able to see the peak.

We assume that this can be because of some issue with the alignment or it can be because of some issue with the photo detector we used. We would like to repeat this experiment and get the signal properly.

I am attaching a flow chart of the setup and also a picture of the mirrors and photo detector we inserted in the Y-End table.

 
Attachment 1: photodetector_alignment.jpg
photodetector_alignment.jpg
Attachment 2: design1.PNG
design1.PNG
  13925   Thu Jun 7 12:20:53 2018 gautamUpdateCDSslow machine bootfest

FSS slow wasn't running so PSL PZT voltage was swinging around a lot. Reason was that was c1psl unresponsive. I keyed the crate, now it's okay. Now ITMX is stuck - Johannes just told be about an un-elogged c1susaux reboot. Seems that ITMX got stuck at ~4:30pm yesterday PT. After some shaking, the optic was loosened. Please follow the procedure in future and if you do a reboot, please elog it and verify that the optic didn't get stuck.

Attachment 1: ITMX_stuck.png
ITMX_stuck.png
  13926   Thu Jun 7 14:35:26 2018 keerthanaUpdateelogTable- useful for doing the scanning.

I think this table will help us to fix the scanning range of the Marconi frequency. This will also help in predicting the position of the resonance peak corresponding to the injected frequency.

fdiff = fm ±80 MHz ;                     fdiff = N*FSRy ;              FSRy = 3.893 MHz.

N = Integer number fdiff =injected fm = Marconi frequency
1 3.893 76.107
2 7.786 72.214
3 11.679 68.321
4 15.572 64.428
5 19.465 60.535
6 23.34 56.66
7 27.251 52.749
8 31.144 48.856
9 35.037 44.963
10 38.93 41.07
11 42.79 37.21
12 46.716 33.284
13 50.609 29.391
  13927   Thu Jun 7 16:15:03 2018 gautamUpdateLSCTRX clipping

I opted for the quickest fix - I raised the height of the offending steering mirror using a 0.25" shim. In the long term, we can get a taller post machined. After raising the mirror height, I then checked the DC centering of the spot on the DC PD using a scope.

Looking at the performance of the X arm ASS, I no longer see the strange oscillatory behaviour I described in my previous post yes. Moreover, the TRX level was ~1 before be raising the steering mirror - but it is now ~1.2. So we were certainly losing some power.

  13928   Thu Jun 7 20:19:53 2018 poojaUpdate  

Just to inform, I'm working in optimus to develop python code to train the neural network since it requires a lot of memory.

  13929   Thu Jun 7 20:21:15 2018 KojiUpdateComputer Scripts / Programs/cvs/cds Backup in danger

Local backup on chiara seems not working since Nov 19, 2017.
/opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/backup/localbackup.log

2017-11-18 07:00:01,504 INFO       Updating backup image of /cvs/cds
2017-11-18 07:03:00,113 INFO       Backup rsync job ran successfully, transferred 1954 files.
2017-11-19 07:00:02,564 INFO       Updating backup image of /cvs/cds
2017-11-19 07:00:02,592 ERROR      External drive not mounted!!!

  13930   Thu Jun 7 22:36:09 2018 not keerthanaUpdatePSLobserving the resonance signal corresponding to the injected frequency.

I worked a bit on the PSL table today

  13931   Fri Jun 8 00:36:54 2018 gautamUpdatePSLobserving the resonance signal corresponding to the injected frequency.

It isn't clear to me in the drawing where the Agilent is during this measurement. Over 40m of cabling, the loss of signal can be a few dB, and considering we don't have a whole lot of signal in the first place, it may be better to send the stronger RF signal (i.e. Marconi pickoff) over the long cable rather than the weak beat signal from the Transmission photodiode. 

  13932   Fri Jun 8 01:08:22 2018 johannesUpdatePSLFirst light of AUX at YEND

Among the things that we hadn't taken care of yesterday before beginning to look for transmission signals were the polarization of the AUX beam on the AS table and optimizing the PLL feedback. The AUX beam is s-polarized on the PSL table (choice due to availablility of mirrors), and I added a half waveplate in front of the fiber to match it's axes. I placed another half-waveplate at the fiber output and send the reflection port of a PBS cube onto a PDA1CS photodetector. By alternatingly turning the waveplates I minimized the reflected light, giving strongly p-polarized light on the AS table for best results when interfering with the IFO beam. I wiggled the fiber and found no strong dependency of the output polarization on fiber bending. Attachment 2 shows the current layout.

The beat signal between AUX and PSL table is at -20dBm, and I adjusted the PLL gain and PI-corner to get reliable locking behavior. I think it's a good idea to keep the AUX beam on the AS table blocked while it's not in use, and only unblock it when it is phaselocked to avoid a rogue beam with no fixed phase relation to the PSL in the IFO.I blocked the beam after completing this work today.

I used the signal chain that Keerthana, Koji, and I set up yesterday to look for mode flashed of the AUX light in the YARM using the RF beat with the PSL carrier in transmission. To align the AUX beam to the arm the following steps were performed:

  1. Using a spectrum analyzer to look at the RF power at the target frequency between frequency-shifted AUX beam and PSL carrier on AS110, align the beam using the mirror pair closest to the fiber coupler for maximum signal.
  2. Initiate a sweep of the PLL LO frequency sourced by the Marconi using GPIB scripts over about 1 FSR. A strong peak was visible at ~31.76 MHz offset frequency
  3. Tune and hold LO frequency (in this case at 48.2526 MHz) such that AUX beam resonates in the arm. Optimize alignment by maximizing RF signal on PD in transmission.

This was followed by a sweep over two full FSRs. Attachment #1 shows the trace recorded by the AG4395 using the max data hold setting during the sweep. Essentially the beat between AUX and PSL carrier traced out the arm's transmission curve. At minimum transmission there was still a ~82dB beat on the transmission PD visible.

The YEND QPD is currently blocked and sees no light.

Attachment 1: AG4395A_07-06-2018_205019.pdf
AG4395A_07-06-2018_205019.pdf
Attachment 2: PSL_AUX_SETUP.pdf
PSL_AUX_SETUP.pdf
Attachment 3: AS_AUX_SETUP.pdf
AS_AUX_SETUP.pdf
  13933   Fri Jun 8 01:58:56 2018 gautamUpdateLSCDRMI locking attempt again

Given the various changes to the IFO config since last Thursday when I was last able to lock the DRMI, I wanted to try once again tonight. However, I had no success. By my judgement, the alignment is fine as judged by looking at mode flashes on the cameras. However, despite following the usual alignment procedures, I did not get a single lock in tonight. indecision

Perhaps we can use a flip mount on the BS that combines the PSL and AUX beams on the AS table, so we have the option of recovering the usual IFO config when we so desire - while Jon needs the SRC locked for his measurement, it would be nice to not have to figure out the correct demod phases etc each time there is a change in the optical setup of the AUX beam.

  13934   Fri Jun 8 14:40:55 2018 c1lscUpdateCDSi am dead
Attachment 1: 31.png
31.png
  13935   Fri Jun 8 20:15:08 2018 gautamUpdateCDSReboot script

Unfortunately, this has happened (and seems like it will happen) enough times that I set up a script for rebooting the machine in a controlled way, hopefully it will negate the need to repeatedly go into the VEA and hard-reboot the machines. Script lives at /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/scripts/cds/rebootC1LSC.sh. SVN committed. It worked well for me today. All applicable CDS indicator lights are now green again. Be aware that c1oaf will probably need to be restarted manually in order to make the DC light green. Also, this script won't help you if you try to unload a model on c1lsc and the FE crashes. It relies on c1lsc being ssh-able. The basic logic is:

  1. Ask for confirmation.
  2. Shutdown all vertex optic watchdogs, PSL shutter.
  3. ssh into c1sus and c1ioo, shutdown all models on these machines, soft reboot them.
  4. ssh into c1lsc, soft reboot the machine. No attempt is made to unload the models.
  5. Wait 2 minutes for all machines to come back online.
  6. Restart models on all 3 vertex FEs (IOPs first, then rest).
  7. Prompt user for confirmation to re-enable watchdog status and open PSL shutter.
Attachment 1: 31.png
31.png
  13936   Sun Jun 10 03:46:38 2018 KojiUpdateIOOWFS HEAD SW confusion

I was checking on the slow machine channels and found something I could not understand.

On the IOO WFS HEAD screen, there are two sets of 4 switches (magenta rectangles in Attachment 1) labeled 2/4/8/16dB.
But as far as I could confirm with the WFS demod (D980233) and WFS head (D980012) drawings, they are the gain (attenuation) switches for the individual segments.
Their epics variable names are "C1:IOO-WFS1_SEG1_ATTEN", "C1:IOO-WFS1_SEG2_ATTEN", etc...

I confirmed the switches are alive (effective), and they are not all ON or OFF. I wonder what is the real situation there...

Attachment 1: C1IOO_WFS_HEADS.png
C1IOO_WFS_HEADS.png
  13937   Sun Jun 10 15:04:33 2018 poojaUpdateCamerasDeveloping neural network

Aim: To develop a neural network in order to correlate the intensity fluctuations in the scattered light to the angular motion of the test mass. A block diagram of the technique employed is given in Attachment 1.

I have used Keras to implement supervised learning using neural network (NN). Initially I had developed a python code that converts a video (59 sec) of scattered light, after an excitation (sine wave of frequency 0.2 Hz) is applied to ETMX pitch, to image frames (of size 480*720)  and stores the 2D pixel values of 1791 images frames captured into an hdf5 file. This array of shape (1791,36500) is given as an input to the neural network. I have tried to implement regular NN only, not convolution or recurrent NN. I have used sequential model in Keras to do this. I have tried with various number of dense layers and varied the number of nodes in each layer. I got test accuracy of approximately 7% using the following network. There are two dense layers, first one with 750 nodes with a dropout of 0.1 ( 10% of the nodes not used) and second one with 500 nodes. To add nonlinearity to the network, both the layers are given an activation function of tanh. The output layer has 1 node and expects an output of shape (1791,1). This model has been compiled with a loss function of categorical crossentropy, optimizer = RMSprop. We have used these since they have been mostly used in the image analysis examples. Then the model is trained against the dataset of mirror motion. This has been obtained by sampling the cosine wave fit to the mirror motion so that the shapes of the input and output of NN are consistent. I have used a batch size ( number of samples per gradient update) = 32 and epochs (number of times entire dataset passes through NN) = 20. However, using this we got an accuracy of only 7.6%. 

I think that the above technique gives overfitting since dense layers use all the nodes during training apart from giving a dropout. Also, the beam spot moves in the video. So it may be necessary to use convolution NN to extract the information.

The video file can be accesses from this link https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VbXcPTfC9GH2ttZNWM7Lg0RqD7qiCZuA/view.

Gabriele told us that he had used the beam spot motion to train the neural network. Also he informed that GPUs are necessary for this. So we have to figure out a better way to train the network.  


gautam noon 11Jun: This link explains why the straight-up fully connected NN architecture is ill-suited for the kind of application we have in mind. Discussing with Gabriele, he informed us that training on a GPU machine with 1000 images took a few hours. I'm not sure what the CPU/GPU scaling is for this application, but given that he trained for 10000 epochs, and we see that training for 20 epochs on Optimus already takes ~30minutes, seems like a futile exercise to keep trying on CPU machines.

Attachment 1: nn_block_diag_2.pdf
nn_block_diag_2.pdf
  13938   Mon Jun 11 11:45:13 2018 keerthana UpdateelogComparison of the analytical and finesse values of TMS and FSR.
Quantity Analytical Value Finesse Value Percentage Error
Free Spectral range (FSR) 3.893408 MHz 3.8863685 MHz 0.180 %
Transverse Mode Spacing (TMS) 1.195503 MHz 1.1762885 MHz 1.607 %

The values obtained from both analytical and finesse solution is given in the above table along with the corresponding percentage errors.finesse1.pdf

The parameters used for this calculation are listed below.

Parameter Value
length of the cavity (L) 38.5 m
Wavelength of the laser beam (\lambda) 1064 nm
Radius of curvature of ITM (R1) \infty
Radius of curvature of ETM (R2) 58 m

The cavity scan data obtained from Finesse is also attached here.

Attachment 1: finesse1.pdf
finesse1.pdf
  13939   Mon Jun 11 13:55:33 2018 keerthanaUpdateGeneralProject Updates

As of now, I have made the codes needed to sweep the marconi frequency for taking the cavity scan data, the photo diode at the y-end is conected to the spectrum analyser already and I also have the finesse simulation of the Ideal Fabry-perot cavity. By seeing my last elog entry, Gautam suggested me that I need to take a different approach for estimating the FSR and TMS value from the Finesse graph. That is, by using least square fit models. Now I am trying to do that and get a better estimate of the error values. Based on my understanding I am dividing this project into various tasks.

1. Getting a better estimate of the error value by using least square fits. Also plotting a graph of frequency Vs mode number and finding the value of Free Spectral Range from its slop.

2. Inserting zernike polynomials to the Finesse simulation and with the help of least square fit, plotting the graph of frequency Vs mode number. Understanding the shifts from the Ideal graph we obtained from step 1. Using this data, plotting the phase map corresponding to this.

3. Repeating step 2 by taking different zernike polynomials and creating a data base which will be useful for the analysis of the real data. This will also prepare me to do the fitting models easily.

4. Collecting data from the IFO and applying these fitting models to it. Finding the set of zernike polynomials which are similar to the actual fugure error of the mirror. Plotting the Phase map corresponding to those zernike polynomials.

If you feel that there is some mistake in the steps, please correct me. It will be really helpful!

  13940   Mon Jun 11 17:18:39 2018 poojaUpdateCamerasCCD calibration

Aim: To calibrate CCD of GigE using LED1050E.

The following table shows some of the specifications for LED1050E as given in Thorlabs datasheet.

Specifications Typical maximum ratings
DC forward current (mA)   100
Forward voltage (V) @ 20mA (VF) 1.25 1.55
Forward optical power (mW) 1.6  
Total optical power (mW) 2.5  
Power dissipation (mW)   130

 The circuit diagram is given in Attachment 1.

Considering a power supply voltage Vcc = 15V, current I = 20mA & forward voltage of led VF = 1.25V, resistance in the circuit is calculated as,

R = (Vcc - VF)/I = 687.5\ohm\ohms\Omega

Attachment 2 gives a plot of resistance (R) vs input voltage (Vcc) when a current of 20mA flows through the circuit. I hope I can proceed with this setup soon.

 

Attachment 1: led_circuit.pdf
led_circuit.pdf
Attachment 2: R_vs_V.pdf
R_vs_V.pdf
  13941   Mon Jun 11 18:10:51 2018 Koji UpdateelogComparison of the analytical and finesse values of TMS and FSR.

Hmm? What is the definition of the percentage error? I don't obtain these numbers from the given values.
And how was the finesse value obtained from the simulation result? Then what is the frequency resolution used in Finesse simulation?

  13942   Mon Jun 11 18:49:06 2018 gautamUpdateCDSc1lsc dead again

Why is this happening so frequently now? Last few lines of error log:

[  575.099793] c1oaf: DAQ EPICS: Int = 199  Flt = 706 Filters = 9878 Total = 10783 Fast = 113
[  575.099793] c1oaf: DAQ EPICS: Number of Filter Module Xfers = 11 last = 98
[  575.099793] c1oaf: crc length epics = 43132
[  575.099793] c1oaf:  xfer sizes = 128 788 100988 100988 
[240629.686307] c1daf: ADC TIMEOUT 0 43039 31 43103
[240629.686307] c1cal: ADC TIMEOUT 0 43039 31 43103
[240629.686307] c1ass: ADC TIMEOUT 0 43039 31 43103
[240629.686307] c1oaf: ADC TIMEOUT 0 43039 31 43103
[240629.686307] c1lsc: ADC TIMEOUT 0 43039 31 43103
[240630.684493] c1x04: timeout 0 1000000 
[240631.684938] c1x04: timeout 1 1000000 
[240631.684938] c1x04: exiting from fe_code()

I fixed it by running the reboot script.

Attachment 1: 36.png
36.png
  13943   Mon Jun 11 19:16:49 2018 keerthanaUpdateelogComparison of the analytical and finesse values of TMS and FSR.

The percentage error which I found out =[(analytical value - finesse value)/analytical value]*100

But inorder to find the finesse value, I just used curser to get the central frequency of each peak and by substracting one from the other I found TMS and FSR.

The resolution was 6500 Hz. Thus, it seems that this method is not actually reliable. I am trying to find the central frequency of each mode with the help of lorentzian fits. I am attaching a fit which I did today. I have plotted its residual graph also.

I am uploading 4 python scripts to the github.

1. Analytical Solution

2. Finesse model- cavity scan

3. Finesse model- fitting

4. Finesse model- residual

Quote:

Hmm? What is the definition of the percentage error? I don't obtain these numbers from the given values.
And how was the finesse value obtained from the simulation result? Then what is the frequency resolution used in Finesse simulation?

fitting_1.pdf

Attachment 1: fitting_1.pdf
fitting_1.pdf
  13944   Mon Jun 11 22:05:03 2018 KojiUpdateelogComparison of the analytical and finesse values of TMS and FSR.

> The percentage error which I found out =[(analytical value - finesse value)/analytical value]*100

Yes, I this does not give us 0.70%

(3.893408 - 3.8863685)/3.893408 *100 = 0.18%

But any way, go for the fitting.

  13945   Mon Jun 11 22:18:18 2018 keerthanaUpdateelogComparison of the analytical and finesse values of TMS and FSR.

Oopss !! I made a mistake while taking the values from my notes. Sorry.

Quote:

> The percentage error which I found out =[(analytical value - finesse value)/analytical value]*100

Yes, I this does not give us 0.70%

(3.893408 - 3.8863685)/3.893408 *100 = 0.18%

But any way, go for the fitting.

 

  13946   Mon Jun 11 22:46:24 2018 KojiUpdateIOOWFS HEAD SW confusion

The unfortunate discovery today was that the attenuator switches on the IMC WFS heads are actually assigned to individual segments, and they are active. That means that we have been running the WFS with an uneven gain setting. The attached PDFs show that the signals with the attenuators on and off all at the same time, while the WFS servo output was frozen. A more annoying feature is that when some of the attenuators are on, this does not lower the gain completely. I mean that the attenuated channels show some reduction of the gain, but that is not the level of reduction we see when all attenuators are turned on. This RF could come from some internal RF coupling or some similar effect.

Moreover, the demodulation phases are quite off for most of the segments.

So far, the WFS is running with this uneven attenuation. We take time to characterize the gain and retune the demod phases and input matrices.

Attachment 1: 180611_IMC_WFS1.pdf
180611_IMC_WFS1.pdf
Attachment 2: 180611_IMC_WFS2.pdf
180611_IMC_WFS2.pdf
  13947   Mon Jun 11 23:22:53 2018 gautamUpdateCDSEX wiring confusion

 [Koji, gautam]

Per this elog, we don't need any AIOut channels or Oplev channels. However, the latest wiring diagram I can find for the EX Acromag situation suggests that these channels are hooked up (physically). If this is true, there are 12 ADC channels that are occupied which we can use for other purposes. Question for Johannes: Is this true? If so, Kira has plenty of channels available for her Temperature control stuff..

As an aside, we found that the EPICS channel names for the TRX/TRY QPD gain stages are somewhat strangely named. Looking closely at the schematic (which has now been added to the 40m DCC tree, we can add out custom mods later), they do (somewhat) add up, but I think we should definitely rename them in a more systematic manner, and use an MEDM screen to indicate stuff like x4 or x20 or "Active" etc. BTW, the EX and EY QPDs have different settings. But at least the settings are changed synchronously for all four quadrants, unlike the WFS heads...


Unrelated: I had to key the c1iscaux and c1auxey crates.

  13948   Tue Jun 12 03:22:25 2018 gautamUpdateLSCAUX laser shuttered

I worked a bit on recovering the DRMI locking again tonight. I decided to shutter the AUX laser on the PSL table at least until I figured out the correct locking settings. As has become customary now, there was a cable in the AS beampath (leading from the AS55 DC monitor to nothing, through the enclosure side panel, it is visible in Attachment #3 in this elog) which I only found after 30mins of futility - please try and remove all un-necessary cables and leave the AS beampath in a usable state after working on the AS table! angry In the end, I got several short (~3mins) stretches in tonight, but never long enough to do the loop characterization I wanted to get in tonight, probably wrong gains in one or more of the loops. In the last 30 minutes, the IMC has been frequently losing lock, so I am quitting for now. The AUX laser remains shuttered.

  13949   Tue Jun 12 14:47:37 2018 gautamBureaucracyGeneralUnlabelled components from EX moved to SP table and labelled

Steve mentioned two unlabelled optics were found at EX, relics from the Endtable upgrade.

  • One was a 1" 45 deg p-pol optic (Y1-1025-C-45P), it looks a bit scratched.
  • The other was a Beam Sampler (BSF10-C).

These are now labelled and forked down on the SP table.

  13950   Tue Jun 12 15:32:15 2018 SteveBureaucracyGeneralSalvaged junk from Xend

Koji's collection of Yend components put away. I cleaned up the  Xend bench today.

Loadcells, leveling wedge mounts  and related items placed under flowbench cabinet next to Guralp staff.

 

  13951   Tue Jun 12 19:27:25 2018 poojaUpdateCamerasCCD calibration

Today I made the led (1050nm) circuit inside a box as given in my previous elog. Steve drilled a 1mm hole in the box as an aperture for led light.

Resistance (R) used = 665 \Omega.

We connected a power supply and IR has been detected using the card.

Later we changed the input voltage and measured the optical power using a powermeter.

Input voltage (Vcc in V) Optical power
0 (dark reading) 60 nW
15 68 \muW
18 82.5 \muW
20 92 \muW

Since the optical power values are very less, we may need to drill a larger hole.

Now the hole is approximately 7mm from led, therefore aperture angle is approximately 2*tan-1(0.5/7) = 8deg. From radiometric curve given in the datasheet of LED1050E, most of the power is within 20 deg. So a hole of size 2* tan(10) *7 = 2.5mm may be required.

I have also attached a photo of the led beam spot on the IR detection card.

Attachment 1: IMG_20180612_163831.jpg
IMG_20180612_163831.jpg
  13952   Wed Jun 13 01:02:40 2018 gautamUpdateLSCReliable and repeatable 1f DRMI locking

[koji, gautam]

With Koji's help, I got repeatable and reliable DRMI locking going again tonight - this is with the AS path optics for the spectroscopy measurement in place, although the AUX laser remained shuttered tonight. Results + spectra tomorrow, but here's what I did:

  • Initial alignment procedure was as usual - use arms+ASS to align ITMs, and then PRMI carrier+ASS to align PRM and BS.
  • Found the appropriate gains and demod phases.
  • Measured loop TFs - PRCL is a big mystery. Used these to finalize loop gains.
  • Ran some sensing lines.
  • Whitened DRMI PDs for a calibrated "low-noise" spectrum (although the coils were not de-whitened).

As I have found before, it is significantly easier to get the locking going post 11pm - the wall Seis BLRMS don't look that much quieter at midnight compared to 10pm, but this might be a scaling issue. I'll do a quantitative assessment next time... Also, Foton takes between 25-45 secs to save an updated filter (timed twice today).

ELOG V3.1.3-