40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  40m Log, Page 66 of 341  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Typeup Category Subject
  14088   Thu Jul 19 13:35:30 2018 SteveSummaryVACannuloses pumped

Roughing down the annuloses required closing V1 for 13 minutes

IFO is 2.2e-5 Torr

Attachment 1: AnsPumped.png
  14090   Fri Jul 20 07:43:54 2018 SteveSummarySUSETMY



Attachment 1: ETMY_leveling.png
Attachment 2: ETMY.png
  14094   Sat Jul 21 01:06:49 2018 gautamSummaryThermal CompensationY arm locking

I implemented this today. For now, the LSC output matrix is set to actuate on MC2 for Y arm locking. As expected, the transmission was much more stable, and the PLL control signal RMS was also reduced by factor of ~3. MC2 control signal does pick up a large (~2000 cts) DC component over a few hours, so we need to relieve this periodically.

Now that we have a workable ASS for the Y arm as well, we should be able to have more confidence in returning to the same beam spot position on the ETM and staying there during a scan using this technique.

The main improvement to be trialled next in the scanning is to improve the speed of scanning. As things stand, my script takes ~2.5 seconds per datapoint. If we can cut this in half, that'd be huge. On Wednesday night, we were extraordinarily lucky to avoid MC3 glitching, EPICS/slow machine failures, and GPIB freezes. Today, the latter reared its head. Fortunately, since I'm dumping data to file for each datapoint, this means we at least have data till the GPIB freeze.


For future measurements, we should consider locking the IMC length to the arm cavity - this would eliminate such alignment drifts, and maybe also make the PLL control signal RMS smaller. 

Not related to this work: Terra, Sandrine, Keerthana and I cleaned up the lab a bit today, and made better cable labels. Aaron and I have to clean up the OMC area a bit. Huge thanks to Steve for taking care of our mess elsewhere in the lab!

  14096   Sat Jul 21 14:03:19 2018 KojiSummaryThermal CompensationY arm locking

Ah. With MC2 feedback, we have about 3 times smaller "optical gain" for the ASS A2L. We have same dither, same actuator, but we need only 1/3 actuation of the MC2 compared to the ETMY case.
We had to reduce the ASS spot servo from 1 to 0.3 to make is stable, so this means that the ASS is really merginally stable.

  14098   Mon Jul 23 09:58:52 2018 SteveSummaryVACRGA scan at day 6



Attachment 1: pd81-560Hz-d6.png
  14103   Wed Jul 25 14:45:59 2018 SandrineSummaryThermal CompensationETM Y Table AUX read out

Attached is a photo of the set up of the ETM Y table showing the AUX read out set up. 

Currently, the flip mount sends the AUX to the PDA255. Terra inserted a razor blade so the PDA255 will witness more HOMs. The laser is also sent to the regular PD and the CCD.

Attachment 1: EY_table_.JPG
  14110   Sat Jul 28 00:45:11 2018 terra, sandrineSummaryThermal CompensationHeater measurements overview

[Sandrine, Koji, Terra]

Summary: We completed multiple scans at different heating powers for the reflector set up, observing unique HOM peak shifts of tens of kHz. We also observed HOM5 shifts with the cylinder set up. Initial Lorentzian fittings of the magnitude give tens of Hz resolution. I summarize the main week's work below. 


Heater set-up is described in several previous elogs, but attachments #1 and #2 show the full heater set-up and wiring/pinouts in and out of vacuum, since we're all intimately aware of how confusing in-vacuum pinouts can be. We are not using the Sorenson power supply (as described in 14071); we just have the BKPrecision power supply 1735 sitting next to the ETMY rack and are manually going out to turn on/off. 

We've continued to use the scan setup described in elog 14086, which is run using /users/annalisa/postVent/AGfast.py. Step by step notes for setting up the scan, running the scans, and processing the scans are attached in notes.txt.

Inducing/witnessing HOMs

The aux input beam was already clipped and on wednesday (after Trans was centered, 14093) we also clipped the output aux beam with razor blade (angled vertically and horizontally, elog 14103) before PDA255; we clipped ~1/3 of the output beam. Attachment #3 shows before and after clipping output, where orange 'cold' == unclipped, black 'mean' == clipped (all in cold state). Up to HOM5 is visible. 


Below is a summary of the available scan data. We also have cold (0A) scans CAR-HOM5 and full FSR scans for most configurations. 

Elliptic Reflector
current[A] voltage[V] power[W] scans
0.4 2 0.8 CAR-HOM3(x1)
0.5 3.4 1.7 CAR-HOM3(x1)
0.6 5 3.0 CAR-HOM3(x1)
0.8 9.4(9.7) 7.5(7.8) CAR-HOM5(>x5)
0.9 12 10.8 CAR-HOM5(x4)
1.09 17 18.5 CAR-HOM3








Cylinder + Lenses
current[A] voltage[V] power[W] scans
0.9 15 13.5 CAR-HOM5(odds x4)

We tried the cylinder set-up again tonight for the first time since inital try and can see shifts of HOM5 - see attachment #5; we haven't looked in detail yet, but it looks like odd modes are more effected, suggesting the ring heat pattern is off centered from the beam axis. 

Scan data is saved in the following format: users/annalisa/postVent/scandata/{reflector,cylinder}/{parsed,unparsed}/{CAR,HOM1,HOM2,HOM3,HOM4,HOM5}{_datetime}{_parsed,_unparsed}.{txt,pdf}

Minimum heating

On 7/26 we increased the power to the elliptical reflector heater in steps to find the minimum heater power required to see frequency shifts with our measurement setup. Lowest we can resolve is a shift in HOM3 with 1.7W (0.5A/3.4V). According to Annalisa's measurements in elog 14050, this would be something like 30-60 mW radiated power hitting the test mass. We only looked at CAR - HOM3 for this investigation; data for scans at 0.4A, 0.5A, 0.6A is available as indicated above.

Lorentizian Fitting

The Lorentzian fitting was done using the equation a + b / sqrt(1+((x-c)/d*2), where a = constant background, b = peak height above background, c = peak frequency, d = full width at half max. 

The fitting is still being edited and optimized. We will crop the data to zoom in around the peak more.

The Lorentzian fit of the magnitude shows ~10Hz of resolution. (See attachment 6 for the carrier at 8A and attachment 7 for HOM 1 at 9A)

We're working on fitting the full complex data.



Attachment 1: heater_setup.jpg
Attachment 2: heater_wiring.jpg
Attachment 3: notes.txt
Notes for running scans:
1. when first turning on Agilent, set initial stuff
    > cd /users/annalisa/postVent/20180718
    > AGmeasure TFAG4395Atemplate.yml
2. tweak arm alignment and offset PLL
    > sitemap (then IFO --> ALIGN and also PSL --> AUX)
    > to increase 
3. make sure X-arm is misagligned (hit '! Misalign' button for ITMX, ETMX) 
3. run scan
    > python AGfast.py startfreq stopfreq points
... 36 more lines ...
Attachment 4: FSR_clipped.pdf
Attachment 5: cylinderHOM5.pdf
Attachment 6: pt8A_CAR.pdf
Attachment 7: pt9A_HOM1.pdf
  14121   Wed Aug 1 16:23:48 2018 KojiSummaryComputersTransition of the main NFS disk on chiara

[Gautam Koji]

Taking the opportunity to shutdown c1ioo for adding a DAC card, we shutdown chiara and worked on moving of the main disk to the bigger home.

We shutdown most of the martian machines including the control machines, megatron, optimus, and nodus.

- Before shutting down chiara, we ran rsync to make the 4TB disk (used to be teh backup) and /cvs/cds synced.

sudo rsync -a --progress /home/cds/ /media/40mBackup

- Modified /etc/fstab

proc            /proc           proc    nodev,noexec,nosuid 0       0
# / was on /dev/sda1 during installation
UUID=972db769-4020-4b74-b943-9b868c26043a /               ext4    errors=remount-ro 0       1
# swap was on /dev/sda5 during installation
UUID=a3f5d977-72d7-47c9-a059-38633d16413e none            swap    sw              0       0
UUID="90a5c98a-22fb-4685-9c17-77ed07a5e000"    /media/40mBackup       ext4      defaults,relatime,commit=60       0         0
#fb:/frames      /frames nfs     ro,bg

UUID=92dc7073-bf4d-4c58-8052-63129ff5755b   /home/cds    ext4    defaults,relatime,commit=60    0   0

- Shutdown chiara. Put the 4TB disk in the chassis. We also installed a new disk (but later it turned out that it only has 2TB...)

- Restart the mahcine. This already made the 4TB disk mounted as /cvs/cds .

- Restart bind9 with DHCP for the diskless clients (cf. https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/CDS/How_to_join_martian)

sudo service bind9 restart
sudo service isc-dhcp-server restart

- Looks like /etc/resolv.conf is automatically overwritten by a tool or something everytime we restart the machine!? I still don't know how to avoid this. (cf.  https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/resolvconf-tutorial). But at least for today we manually wrote /etc/resolv.conf

controls@chiara|backup> cat /etc/resolv.conf
# Dynamic
resolv.conf(5) file for
glibc resolver(3) generated by resolvconf(8)

search martian

  14122   Wed Aug 1 19:41:15 2018 gautamSummaryComputersRTCDS recovery, c1ioo changes

[Gautam Koji]

After this work, we recovered the nominal RTCDS state. The main points were:

  1. We needed to restart the bind9 service on chiara such that the FEs knew their IP addresses upon reboot and hence, could get their root filesystems over NFS.
  2. We recovered suspension local damping, IMC locking and POX/POY locking with nominal arm transmission.

Some stuff that is not working as usual:

  1. The EX QPD is reporting strange transmission values - even with the PRM completely misaligned, it reports transmission of ~30. But we were able to lock the Xarm with the Thorlabs PD and revover transmission of ~1.15.
  2. The X arm green does not stay locked to the cavity - the alignment looks fine, and the green flashes are strong, but the lock does not hold. This shouldn't be directly connected to anything we did today since the Green PDH servo is entirely analog.

I made a model change in c1x03 (the IOP model on c1ioo) to add a DAC part. The model compiled, installed and started correctly, and looking at dmesg on c1ioo, it recognises the DAC card as what it is. Next step is to use a core on c1ioo for a c1omc model, and actually try driving some signals.

Note that the only change made to the c1ioo expansion chassis was that a DAC card was installed into the PCIe bus. The adaptor card which allows interfacing the DAC card to an AI board was already in the expansion chassis, presumably from whenever the DAC was removed from this machine.

*I think I forgot to restart optimus after this work...

Attachment 1: CDS_overview.png
  14123   Wed Aug 1 20:44:57 2018 gautamSummaryComputersc1omc model (re?)created

The main motivation behind adding a DAC card in c1ioo was to setup an RTCDS model for the OMC. Attachment #1 shows the new look CDS overview screen. Here is what I did.

Mostly, I followed instructions from when I setup the model for the EX green PZTs.

Simulink model:

The model is just a toy for now (CDS parameters, ADC block and 2 CDS filter modules). I leave it to Aaron to actually populate it, check functionality etc. The path to the model is /opt/rtcds/caltech/c1/userapps/release/isc/c1/models/c1omc.mdl. I am listing the parameters set on the CDS_PARAMETERS block:

  • host = c1ioo
  • site = c1
  • rate = 16k
  • dcuid = 27 (which I chose after making sure that this dcuid was not used on this list which I also updated by adding c1omc and moving c1imc to "old")
  • specific_cpu = 6 (again chosen after checking the available CPUs in the above list and confirming using the cset utility).
  • adc_Slave = 1
  • shmem_daq = 1
  • no_rfm_dma = 1
  • biquad = 1

Building and installing model:

Once the model was installed, I logged into c1ioo, and built and installed the models using the usual rtcds make and rtcds install instructions. Before starting the model, I edited /diskless/root.jessie/etc/rtsystab to allow c1omc to be run on c1ioo. Using sudo cset set, I verified that CPU #6 is no longer listed (if I understand correctly, the RTCDS system takes over the core).


To reflect all this on the MEDM CDS OVERVIEW screen, I just edited the screen.

  • Moved the orange explanation of bits over to the c1iscey panel to make space in the c1ioo panel.
  • Edited the macros to reflect the c1omc parameters.


Finally, I followed the instructions here to get the channels into frames and make all the indicators green. Went into fb and restarted the daqd processes. All looks good smiley. I'm going to leave the model running overnight to investigate stability. I forgot to svn commit the model tonight, will do it tomorrow.

The testing plan (at least initially) is to install the AA and AI boards from the OMC rack in 1X1/1X2. Then we will have short SCSI cables running from the ADC/DAC to these. The actual HV driving stages will remain in the OMC rack (NE corner of AS table).

@Steve, can we get 10 Male-Female D9 cables so that we can run them from 1X1/1X2 to the OMC rack?

Unrelated to this work: There were 2 crashes of the models on c1lsc, one ~6pm and one right now ~1030pm. The restart script brought everything back gracefully  yes...

Attachment 1: CDS_OVERVIEW_withOMC.png
  14125   Thu Aug 2 20:47:29 2018 gautamSummaryElectronicsX Green "Mystery" solved

I walked down to the X end and found that the entire AUX laser electronics rack isn't getting any power. There was no elog about this.

I couldn't find any free points in the power strip where I think all this stuff was plugged in so I'm going to hold off on resurrecting this until tomorrow when I'll work with Steve.


The X arm green does not stay locked to the cavity - the alignment looks fine, and the green flashes are strong, but the lock does not hold. This shouldn't be directly connected to anything we did today since the Green PDH servo is entirely analog.

  14126   Thu Aug 2 20:54:18 2018 gautamSummaryComputersc1omc model looks stable

Actually, c1lsc had crashed again sometime last night so I had to reboot everything this morning. I used the reboot script again, but I increased the sleep time between trying to start up the models again so that I could walk into the VEA and power cycle the c1lsc expansion chassis, as this kind of frequent model crash has been fixed by doing so in the past. Sure enough, there have been no issues since I rebooted everything at ~1030 in the morning. 

The c1omc model itself has been stable as well, though of course, there is nothing in there at the moment. I may do a check of the newly installed DAC tomorrow just to see that we can put out a sine wave.

Steve has ordered the D-sub cabling that will allow us to route signals between AA/AI boards in 1X1/1X2 to the HV PZT electronics in the OMC rack. Things look setup for a measurement next week. Aaron will post a block diagram + photoz of what box goes where in the electronics racks.

  14127   Thu Aug 2 23:09:25 2018 ranaSummaryComputersX Green "Mystery" solved

I'm going to guess that this was me: I was disconnecting some octopus power strip nonsense down there (in particular illuminators and cameras), so I might have turned off the AUX rack by mistake.


I walked down to the X end and found that the entire AUX laser electronics rack isn't getting any power. There was no elog about this.

I couldn't find any free points in the power strip where I think all this stuff was plugged in so I'm going to hold off on resurrecting this until tomorrow when I'll work with Steve.


The X arm green does not stay locked to the cavity - the alignment looks fine, and the green flashes are strong, but the lock does not hold. This shouldn't be directly connected to anything we did today since the Green PDH servo is entirely analog.

  14128   Fri Aug 3 14:35:56 2018 gautamSummaryElectronicsEX AUX electronics power restored

Steve and I restored the power to the EX AUX electronics rack. The power strip on the lowest shelf of the AUX rack now goes to another power strip laid out vertically along the NW corner of 1X9. The EX green locks to the arm just fine now.

  14138   Mon Aug 6 09:42:10 2018 KojiSummaryComputersTransition of the main NFS disk on chiara

Follow up:

- At least it was confirmed that the local backup (4TB->2TB) is regularly running every morning.

- The 2TB disk was used up to 95%. To ease the size of the remaining space, I have further compressed the burt snapshot folders. (~2016). This released another 150GB. The 2TB is currently used up to  87%.


Filesystem      1K-blocks       Used  Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sdc1      3845709644 1731391748 1918967020  48% /home/cds
/dev/sdd1      2113786796 1886162780  120249888  95% /media/40mBackup


Filesystem      1K-blocks       Used  Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sdc1      3845709644 1731706744 1918652024  48% /home/cds
/dev/sdd1      2113786796 1728124828  278287840  87% /media/40mBackup


  14175   Wed Aug 22 00:22:05 2018 KojiSummaryElectronicsInspection of the possible dual backplane interfaces for Acromag DAQ

[Johannes, Koji]

We went around the LSC, PSL, IOO, and SUS racks to check how many dual backplane interfaces will be required.

Euro card modules are connected to the backplane with two DIN 41612 connectors (as you know). The backplane connectors provide DC supplies and GND connections.
In addition, they are also used for the input and output connections with the fast and slow machines.

According to the past inspection by Johannes, most of the modules just use the upper DIN41612 connector (called P1). But there are some modules exhibited the possibility of the additional use of the other connector (P2).

Tuesday afternoon Johannes and I made the list of the modules with the possible dual use. And I took a time to check the modules with DCC, Jay's schematics, and the visual inspection of the actual modules.

LSC Rack

  • Common mode servo (D040180 Rev B)
    • Schematic source D040180 Rev B D1500308
    • Assesment: Both P1 and P2 are to be connected to Acromag, but there are only a few channels on P2
    • P1: 1A-32A Digital In
    • P2: 1A-3A Analog Out (D32/33/34, SLOW MON and spare?)
            9A Digital Out for D35 (Limitter)
            10A-15A Spare
            16A Digital In (Latch Enable/Disable)
            25A, 25C  Differential Analog in (Differential offset input, indicated as "BIAS") 
  • PD Interface (D990543 Rev B)
    • Schematic source D990543 RevB
    • Assesment: No connection necessary. We don't monitor/control anything of any LSC PDs from Acromag.

PSL Rack

  • Generic DAQ Interface (D990155) - This is a DAC interface.
    • Schematic source: Jay's page D990155 Rev.B All the lines between P2 and P3 are connected.
    • Assesment: Only P2 is to be connected to Acromag.
    • P1 DAC mon -> not necessary
    • P2 A1-A16, Connected to DAC in P2-P3
  • PMC Servo
    • Schematic source: LIGO DCC D980352
    • Assesment: Only P1 (1A-9A) is to be connected to Acromag. (Just one DSub is sufficient)
    • P1 1A-9A
  • Crystal Ref (D980353)
    • Schematic source: LIGO DCC D980353
    • Assesment: Only P1 (1A-4A) is to be connected to Acromag. (Just one DSub is sufficient)
    • P1 1A-4A
    • Schematic source: PNot found
    • Assesment: Probably Only P1 is sufficient. We need to analyze the board to figure out the channel assignment.

IOO Rack

  • PD Interface (D990543 Rev B)
    • Schematic source D990543 RevB
    • Assesment: Only P1 connection is sufficient.
  • Generic DAQ Interface (D990155)
    • Assesment: Remove the module. We already have the same module in PSL Rack. This is redundant.
  • Common mode servo (D040180 Rev B)
    • See above
  • Pentek Generic Input Board D020432
    • Schematic source Jay's page D020432-A
    • Assesment: No connection. There is no signal on the backplane.

SUS Rack

  • SUS Dewhitening
    • Schematic source: Jay's page D000316-A
    • Assesment: No connection.
    • We can omit Mon CHs.
    • Bypass/Inputs are already connected to the fast channels.


  14177   Wed Aug 22 12:22:27 2018 ranaSummaryElectronicsInspection of the possible dual backplane interfaces for Acromag DAQ

I think we don't need to keep Crystal Ref: we can change this into a regular Wenzel box with no outside control or monitoring.



  • Crystal Ref (D980353)
    • Schematic source: LIGO DCC D980353
    • Assesment: Only P1 (1A-4A) is to be connected to Acromag. (Just one DSub is sufficient)
    • P1 1A-4A


  14213   Sun Sep 23 20:15:35 2018 KojiSummaryOMCMontecarlo simulation of the phase difference between P and S pols for a modeled HR mirror

Link to OMC_Lab ELOG 308

  14367   Wed Dec 19 14:19:15 2018 KojiSummaryVACPlan for pumpoing down test

We still need elaborated test procedure posted

12/29 Wed

  • Jon continues to work on valve actuator tests.
  • Chub continues to work on wiring / fixing wiring.
  • At the end of the day Jon is going to send out a notification email of "GO"/"NO GO" for pumping.


12/30 Thu

  • 9AM: Start closing two doors unless Jon gives us NO GO sign.
  • 10AM: Start pumping down
    • Test roughing pump capability via new control system
    • (Independently) Test turbo rotating procedure. This time we will not open the gate valve between the TP1 and the main volume. This is because we want to take care of the backing turbo loads while we gradually open the gate valve. This will take more hours to be done and we will not be able to finish this test by the end of Thu.
    • At the end of the procedure, we isolate the main volume, stop all the pumps, and vent the roghing pumps to save them from the oil backstream.

gautam: Koji and I were just staring at the vacuum screen, and realized that the drypumps, which are the backing pumps for TP2 and TP3, are not reflected on the MEDM screen. This should be rectified.

Steve also mentioned that the new small turbo controller does not directly interface with the drypump. So we need some system to delay the starting of the turbo itself, once the drypump has been engaged. Does this system exist?

Attachment 1: Screenshot_from_2018-12-19_14-49-34.png
  14439   Thu Feb 7 17:27:53 2019 KojiSummaryTip-TIltFive FiveNine Optics Optics delivered

5 PR3/SR3 optics from FiveNine Optics were delivered. The data sheets were scanned and uploaded to the following wiki page. https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/Aux_Optics

  14442   Fri Feb 8 00:20:56 2019 gautamSummaryTip-TIltFive FiveNine Optics Optics delivered

They have been stored on the 3rd shelf from top in the clean optics cabinet at the south end. EX


5 PR3/SR3 optics from FiveNine Optics were delivered. The data sheets were scanned and uploaded to the following wiki page. https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/Aux_Optics

  14444   Fri Feb 8 20:35:57 2019 gautamSummaryTip-TIltCoating spec

[Attachment #1]: Computed spectral power transmissivity (according to my model) for the coating design at a few angles of incidence. Behavior lines up well with what FNO measured, although I get a transmission that is slightly lower than measured at 45 degrees. I suspect this is because of slight changes in the dispersion relation assumed and what was used for the coating in reality.

[Attachment #2]: Similar information as Attachment #1, but with the angle of incidence as the independent parameter in a continuous sweep. 

Conclusion: The coating behaves in a way that is in reasonable agreement with our model. At 41.1 degrees, which is what the PR3 angle of incidence will be, T<50 ppm, which was what we specified. The larger range of angles was included because originally, we thought of using this optic as a substitute for SR3 as well. But I claim that for the shorter SRC (signal recycling as opposed to RSE), we will not end up using the new optic, but rather go for the G&H mirror. In any case, as Koji pointed out, ~50 ppm extra loss in the RC will not severely limit the recycling gain. Such large variation was not seen in the MC analysis because we only varied the angle of incidence by +/- 0.5 degrees about the nominal design value of 41.1 degrees.

Attachment 1: specRefl.pdf
Attachment 2: AoIscan.pdf
  14448   Mon Feb 11 19:53:59 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementLoss measurement setup

To measure the Y-arm loss, I decided to start with the classic reflectivity method. To prepare for this measurement, I did the following:

  1. Placed a PDA 520 in the AS beam path on the AS table.
  2. Centered AS beam on above PDA 520.
  3. Monitored signal from PDA520 and the MC transmission simultaneously in the single-bounce from ITMY config (i.e. all other optics were misaligned). Convinced myself that variations in the two signals were correlated, thus ruling out in this rough test any interference from ghost beams from ITMX / PRM etc.
  4. For the DAQ, I decided to use the two ALS Y arm channels in 1Y4, mainly because we have some whitening electronics available there - the OMC model would've been ideal but we don't have free whitening channels available there. So I ran long BNCs to the rack, labelled them.
  5. It'd be nice to have these signals logged to frames, so I added DQ-channels for the IN1 points of the BEATY_FINE filters, recording at 2048 Hz for now. Of course this necessitated restart of the c1lsc model, which caused all the vertex FEs to crash, but the reboot script brought everything back smoothly.
  6. Not sure what to make of the shape of the spectrum of the AS photodiode, see Attachment #1 - looks like some kind of scattering shelf but I checked the centering on the PD itself, looks good. In any case, with the whitening gains I'm using, seems like both channels are measuring above ADC noise.
  7. Found that the existing misalignment to the ETMY does not eliminate signatures of cavity flash in the AS photodiode. So I increased the amount of misalignment until I saw no evidence of flashes in the reflected photodiode.
  8. Johannes' old scripts didn't work out of the box - so I massaged it into a form that works.
  9. Re-centered Oplevs to try and keep them as well centered in the linear range as possible, maybe the DC position info from the Oplevs is useful in the analysis.

I'm running a measurement tonight, starting now (~1130PM), should be done in ~1hour, may need to do more data-quality improvements to get a realistic loss number, but I figured I'd give this a whirl.

I'm rather pleased with an initial look at the first align/misalign cycle, at least there is discernable contrast between the two states - Attachment #2. The data is normalized by MC transmission, and then sig.decimated by x512 (8**3).

Attachment 1: DQcheck.pdf
Attachment 2: initialData.pdf
  14449   Tue Feb 12 18:00:32 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementLoss measurement setup

Another arm loss measurement started at 6pm.

  14450   Tue Feb 12 22:59:17 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementY arm loss


There are still several data quality issues that can be improved. I think there is little point in reading too much into this until some of the problems outlined below are fixed and we get a better measurement.


  1. Mainly, we are plagued by the inability of the ASS system to get back to the good transmission levels - I haven't done a careful diagnosis of the servo, but the ITM PIT output always seems to run away. As a result, the later measurements are poor, as can be seen in Attachment #2.
  2. For this reason, we can't easily sample different spot positions on the ETM.
  3. Data processing:
    • Download AS reflection and MC transmission DQ channels
    • Take their ratio
    • Downsample to 4 Hz by repeated application of scipy.signal.decimate by a factor of 8 each time, thrice, with the filtfilt option enabled
  4. Attachment #1 and #2 are basically showing the same data - the former collects all locked (top left) and misaligned (top right) data segments and plots them with the corresponding TRY values in the bottom row. The second plot shows a pseudo-continuous time series (pseudo because the segments transitioning from locked to misaligned states have been excised).

As an interim fix, I'm going to try and use the Oplevs as a DC reference, and run the dither alignment from zero each time, as this prevents the runaway problem at least. Data run started at 11:20 pm.

Attachment 1: segmented.pdf
Attachment 2: consolidated.pdf
  14451   Wed Feb 13 02:28:58 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementY arm loss

Attachment #1 shows estimated systematic uncertainty contributions due to 

  1. ITM transmission by +/- 0.01 % about the nominal value of 1.384 %
  2. ETM transmission of +/- 3 ppm about the nominal value of 13.7 ppm
  3. Mode matching efficiency into the cavity by +/- 5% about the nominal value of 92%.

In all the measurements so far, the ratio seems to be < 1, so this would seem to set a lower bound on the loss of ~35 ppm. The dominant source of systematic uncertainty is the 5% assumed fudge in the mode-matching

To do: 

  1. Account for uncertainties on modulation depths
  2. To estimate if the amount of fluctuation we are seeing in the reflected signal even after normalizing by the MC transmission, get an estimate of statistical uncertainty in the reflected power due to 
    • Pointing jitter - is there some spec for the damped angular displacement of the TT1/TT2?
    • Cavity length in-loop residual

Bottom line: I think we need to have other measurements and simultaenously analyse the data to get a more precise estimate of the loss.

Attachment 1: systUnc.pdf
  14454   Thu Feb 14 21:29:24 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementInferred Y arm loss


From the measurements I have, the Y arm loss is estimated to be 58 +/- 12 ppm. The quoted values are the median (50th percentile) and the distance to the 25th and 75th quantiles. This is significantly worse than the ~25 ppm number Johannes had determined. The data quality is questionable, so I would want to get some better data and run it through this machinery and see what number that yields. I'll try and systematically fix the ASS tomorrow and give it another shot.

Model and analysis framework:

Johannes and I have cleaned up the equations used for this calculation - while we may make more edits, the v1 of the document lives here. The crux of it is that we would like to measure the quantity \kappa = \frac{P_L}{P_M}, where P_{L(M)} is the power reflected from the resonant cavity (just the ITM). This quantity can then be used to back out the round-trip loss in the resonant cavity, with further model parameters which are:

  1. ITM and ETM power transmissivities
  2. Modulation depths and mode-matching efficiency into the cavity
  3. The statistical uncertainty on the measurement of the quantity \kappa, call it \sigma_{\kappa}

If we ignore the 3rd for a start, we can calculate the "expected" value of \kappa as a function of the round-trip loss, for some assumed uncertainties on the above-mentioned model parameters. This is shown in the top plot in Attachment #1, and while this was generated using emcee, is consistent with the first order uncertainty propagation based result I posted in my previous elog on this subject. The actual samples of the model parameters used to generate these curves are shown in the bottom. What this is telling us is that even if we have no measurement uncertainty on \kappa, the systematic uncertainties are of the order of 5 ppm, for the assumed variation in model parameters.

The same machinery can be run backwards - assuming we have multiple measurements of \kappa, we then also have a sample variance, \sigma_{\kappa}. The uncertainty on the sample variance estimator is also known, and serves to quantify the prior distribution on the parameter \sigma_{\kappa} for our Monte-Carlo sampling. The parameter \sigma_{\kappa} itself is required to quantify the likelihood of a given set of model parameters, given our measurement. For the measurements I did this week, my best estimate of \kappa \pm \sigma_{\kappa} = 0.995 \pm 0.005. Plugging this in, and assuming uncorrelated gaussian uncertainties on the model parameters, I can back out the posterior distributions.

For convenience, I separate the parameters into two groups - (i) All the model parameters excluding the RT loss, and (ii) the RT loss. Attachment #2 and Attachment #3 show the priors (orange) and posteriors (black) of these quantities. 


  1. This particular technique only gives us information about the RT loss - much less so about the other model parameters. This can be seen by the fact that the posteriors for the loss is significantly different from the prior for the loss, but not for the other parameters. Potentially, the power of the technique is improved if we throw other measurements at it, like ringdowns.
  2. If we want to reach the 5 ppm uncertainty target, we need to do better both on the measurement of the DC reflection signals, and also narrow down the uncertainties on the other model parameters.

Some assumptions:

So that the experts on MC analysis can correct me wheere I'm wrong.

  1. The prior distributions are truncated independent Gaussians - truncated to avoid sampling from unphysical regions (e.g. negative ITM transmission). I've not enforced the truncation analytically - i.e. I just assume a -infinity probability to samples drawn from the unphysical parts, but to be completely sure, the actual cavity equations enforce physicality independently (i.e. the MC generates a set of parameters which is input to another function, which checks for the feasibility before making an evaluation). One could argue that the priors on some of these should be different - e.g. uniform PDF for loss between some bounds? Jeffrey's prior for \sigma_{\kappa}?
  2. How reasonable is it to assume the model parameter uncertainties are uncorrelated? For exaple, \eta, \beta_1, \beta_2 are all determined from the ALS-controlled cavity scan
Attachment 1: modelPerturb.pdf
Attachment 2: posterior_modelParams.pdf
Attachment 3: posterior_Loss.pdf
  14463   Sun Feb 17 17:35:04 2019 gautamSummaryLoss MeasurementInferred X arm loss


To complete the story before moving on to ALS, I decided to measure the X arm loss. It is estimated to be 20 +/- 5 ppm. This is surprising to say the least, so I'm skeptical - the camera image of the ETMX spot when locked almost certainly looks brighter than in Oct 2016, but I don't have numerical proof. But I don't see any obvious red flags in the data quality/analysis yet. If true, this suggests that the "cleaning" of the Yarm optics actually did more harm than good, and if that's true, we should attempt to identify where in the procedure the problem lies - was it in my usage of non-optical grade solvents?


  1. Unlike the Y arm, the ratio \kappa = 1.006 \pm 0.002 is quite unambiguously greater than 1, which is already indicative of the loss being lower than for the Y arm. This is reliably repeatable over 15 datapoints at least.
  2. Attachment #1 shows the spectrum of the single-bounce off ITMX beam and compares it to ITMY - there is clearly a difference, and my intuition is to suspect some scatter / clipping, but I confirmed that on the AS table, in air, there is no clipping. So maybe it's something in vacuum? But I'm not sure how to explain its absence for the ITMX reflection. I didn't check the Michelson alignment since I misaligned ITMY before locking the XARM - so maybe there's a small shift in the axis of the X arm reflection relative to the Yarm because of the BS alignment. The other possibility is clipping at the BS?
  3. Attachment #2 shows the filtered time series for a short segment of the measurement. The X arm ASS is mostly well behaved, but the main thing preventing me from getting more statistics in is the familiar ETMX glitching problem, which while doesn't directly break the lock causes large swings in TRX. Given the recent experience with ETMY satellite box, I'm leaning towards blaming flaky electronics for this. If this weren't a problem, I'd run a spatial scan of ETMX, but I'm not going to attack this problem today.
  4. Attachments #3 and #4 show the posterior distributions for model parameters and loss respectively. 
  5. Data quality checks done so far (suggestions welcome):
    • Confirmed that there is no fringing from other ITM (in this case ITMY) / PRM / SRM / ETM in the single-bounce off ITMX config, by first macroscopically misaligning all these optics (the spots could be seen to move on the AS port PD, until they vanished, at some point presumably getting clipped in-vac), and then moving the optics around in PIT/YAW and looking for any effect in the fast time-series using NDScope.
    • Checked for slow drifts in locked / misaligned states - looks okay.
    • Checked centering on PDA520 using both o'scope plateau method and IR viewer - I believe the beam to be well centered.

Provisional conclusions:

  1. The actual act of venting / pumping down doesn't have nearly as large an effect on the round-trip loss as does working in chamber - the IX and EX chambers have not been opened since the 2016 vent.
  2. The solvent marks visible with the green flashlight on ETMY possibly signals the larger loss for the Y arm. 
Attachment 1: DQcheck_XARM.pdf
Attachment 2: consolidated.pdf
Attachment 3: posterior_modelParams_XARM.pdf
Attachment 4: posterior_Loss_XARM.pdf
  14464   Mon Feb 18 19:16:55 2019 ranaSummaryComputersnew laptop setup: ASIA

The old IBM laptop (Asia) has died from a fan error after 7 years. WE have a new Lenovo 330 IdeaPad to replace it:

  1. to enter bios, the usual FN keys don't work. Power off laptop. Insert paperclip into small hole on laptop side with upside-down U symbol. Laptop powers up into BIOS setup.
  2. Insert SL 7.6 DVD into drive
  3. Change all settings from modern UEFI into Legacy support. Change Boot order to put CDROM first.
  4. Boot.
  5. Touchpad is not detected. Hookup mouse for setup.
  6. Delete windows partition.
  7. Setup wireless network according to (https://wiki-40m.ligo.caltech.edu/Network). Computer name = asia.martian. 
  8. Set root password. Do not create user (we want to make the controls acct later using the command line so that we can set userID and groupID both to 1001).
  9. Begin install...lots of disk access noises for awhile...

Install done. Touchpad not recognized by linux - lots of forum posts about kernel patching...Arrgh!

  14474   Tue Mar 5 15:56:27 2019 gautamSummaryTip-TIltDiscussion points about TT re-design

Chub, Koji and I have been talking about Udit's re-design. Here are a few points that were raised. Chub/Koji can add to/correct where necessary. Summary is that this needs considerable work before we can order the parts for a prototype and characterize it. I think the requirements may be stated as:

  1. The overall pendulum length should be similar to that of the SOS, i.e. ~0.3m (current length is more like 0.1m) such that the eigenfrequencies are lowered to more like ~1 Hz. Mainly we wan't to avoid any overlap with the stack eigenmodes. This may require an additional stiffening piece near the top of the tower as we have for the SOS. What is a numerical way to spec this?
  2. The center of the 2" optic should be 6" from the table.
  3. The mass of the optic + holder should be similar to the current design so we may use the same suspension wires (I believe they are a different thickness than that used for the SOS).
  4. Ensure we can extract any transmitted beams without clipping.
  5. Fine pitch adjustment capablity should be yyy mrad (20mrad?).
  6. We should preserve the footprint of the existing TTs, given the space constraints in vacuum. Moreover, we should be able to use dog-clamps to fix the tower in place, so the base plate should be designed accordingly.
  7. Keep the machining requirements as simple as possible while achieving the above requirements- i.e. do we really need rounded optic holder? Why not just rectangular? Similarly for other complicated features in the current design.

Some problems with Udit's design as it stands:

  1. I noticed that the base of the TT and the center of the 2" optic are 4" separated. The SOS cage base and center of 3" optic are separated by 6". Currently, there is an adaptor piece that raises the TT height to match that of the SOS. If we are doing a re-design, shouldn't we just aim for the correct height in the first place?
  2. Udit doesn't seem to have taken into account the torque due to the optic+holder in the pitch balancing calculations he did. Since this is expected to be >> that of any rod/screw we use for fine pitch balancing, we need to factor that into the calculation.
  3. For the coarse pitch adjustment, we'd need to slide the wire clamping piece relative to the optic holding piece. Rather than do this stochastically and hope for the best, the idea was to use a threaded screw to realize this operation in a controlled way. However, Udit's design doesn't include the threaded hole.
  4. There are many complicated machining features which are un-necessary.
  14485   Mon Mar 18 18:10:14 2019 KojiSummaryGeneralTask items and priority

[Gautam/Chub/Koji] ~ Mini discussion

Maintenance / Upgrade Items

(Priority high to low)

  • TT/IO suspension upgrade (solidworks work) -> order components -> TT characterization
  • Acromag upgrade c1susaux
    • Produce spread sheetfor DB files. Learn new format of the DB file with Acromag. Develop a python code for the DB file generation (Jon->Koji)
  • Satellite Box upgrade
    • Rack mount? Front panel DB connectors. New circuits (PD-LED)
  • Acromag iscaux1/2 & isc whitening upgrade
  • new RC mirror characterization -> installation
  14543   Mon Apr 15 18:29:07 2019 ranaSummaryComputersnew laptop setup: ASIA - yum issues

had trouble using YUM to update. This turned out to be a config problem with our Martian router, not the new laptop. Since I've changed the WiFi pwd awhile ago for the martian access for the CDS laptops, you'll have to enter that in order to use the laptops.

turned out to be some Access Control nonsense inside of the router. Even loggin in as admin with a cable gave some of the fields the greyed out color (had to hover over the link and then type the URL directly in the browser window). ASIA is now able to connect and use YUM + usual connections. Gautam and I have also moved the router a little to get easier view of its LED lights and not blockk its WiFi signal with the cable tray. We'll get a little shelf so that we can mount it ~1 foot off of the wall.

still, this seems like a bad laptop choice: the Lenovo Ideapad 330 will not have its touchpad supported by SL7 without compiling a new version of the kernel frown

  14568   Wed Apr 24 17:39:15 2019 YehonathanSummaryLoss MeasurementBasic analysis of loss measurement


  • Getting myself familiar with Python.
  • Characterize statistical errors in the loss measurement.


​The precision of the measurement is excellent. We should move on to look for systematic errors. 

In Detail

According to Johannes and Gautam (see T1700117_ReflectionLoss .pdf in Attachment 1), the loss in the cavity mirror is obtained by measuring the light reflected from the cavity when it is locked and when it is misaligned. From these two measurements and by using the known transmissions of the cavity mirrors, the roundtrip loss is extracted.

I write a Python notebook (AnalyzeLossData.ipynb in Attachment 1) extracting the raw data from the measurement file (data20190216.hdf5 in Attachment 1) analyzing the statistics of the measurement and its PSD.

Attachment 2 shows the raw data. 

Attachment 3 shows the histogram of the measurement. It can be seen that the distribution is very close to being Gaussian.

The loss in the cavity pre roundtrip is measured to be 73.7+/-0.2 parts per million. The error is only due to the deviation in the PD measurement. Considering the uncertainty of the transmissions of the cavity mirrors should give a much bigger error.

Attachment 4 shows noise PSD of the PD readings. It can be seen that the noise spectrum is quite constant and there would be no big improvement by chopping the signal.

The situation might be different when the measurement is taken from the cavity lock PD where the signal is much weaker.

Attachment 1: LossMeasurementAnalysis.zip
Attachment 2: LossMeasurement_RawData.pdf
Attachment 3: LossMeasurement_Hist.pdf
Attachment 4: LossMeasurement_PSD.pdf
  14598   Wed May 8 22:11:46 2019 ranaSummaryComputersnew laptop setup: ASIA - yum issues
  • setup controls user using K Thorne LLO CDS offsite workstation instructions
  • modified /etc/fstab ala pianosa to NFS mount disks
  • set up symlinks as other workstations
  • troubles with libsasl2 and libmetaio libraries as usual for SL7 - doing symlink tricks
  • setup shared .bashrc
  • now running 'yum install gds-all' to see if we need more local libraries to run GDS from the shared disks...
  14616   Fri May 17 10:12:07 2019 AnjaliSummaryEquipment loanBorrowed component

I borrowed one Marconi (2023 B) from 40 m lab to QIL lab.

  14618   Fri May 17 16:07:25 2019 gautamSummaryEquipment loanBorrowed component

ZHL-3A (2 units) —-> QIL


I borrowed one Marconi (2023 B) from 40 m lab to QIL lab.

  14624   Mon May 20 13:16:57 2019 gautamSummaryComputersnew laptop setup: ASIA - ndscope and diaggui

Following instructions here, I installed ndscope on this machine. DTT still could not be be run from this machine, and I want to use this today - so I ran the following commands from the K. Thorne setup instructions.

yum clean metadata
yum update
yum install cds-workstation pcaspy subversion redhat-lsb  gnuradio google-chrome-stable xorg-x11-drv-nvidia epel-release redhat-lsb

Now diaggui can be opened, and spectra can be made. I'm moving this laptop to its new home at EY.

  • now running 'yum install gds-all' to see if we need more local libraries to run GDS from the shared disks...
  14725   Thu Jul 4 10:54:21 2019 KojiSummarySUSSuspension damping recovered, ITMX stuck

So Cal Earthquake. All suspension watchdogs tripped.

Tried to recover the OSEM damping. 

=> The watchdogs for all suspensions except for ITMX were restored. ITMX seems to be stuck. No further action by me for now.

  14730   Fri Jul 5 23:28:52 2019 rana, kruthiSummarySUSETMX unstuck by shaking the stack

We unstuck ETMX by shaking the stack. Most effective was to apply large periodic human sized force to the north STACIS mounts.

At first, we noticed that the face OSEMs showed nearly zero variation.

We tried unsticking it through the usual ways of putting large excitations through AWG into the pit/yaw/side DOFs. This produced only ~0.2 microns of motion as seen by the OSEMs.

After the stack shake, we used the IFO ALIGN sliders to get the oplev beam back on the QPD.

The ETMX sensor trends observed before and after the earthquake are attached.

** plots deleted; SOMEONE, tried to take raster images and turn them into PDF as if this would somehow satisfy our vetor graphics requirement. Boo. lpots must be actual vector graphics PDF

  14736   Tue Jul 9 08:33:31 2019 gautamSummarySUSETMX PIT bias voltage changed by ~1V

After this activity, the DC bias voltage required on ETMX to restore good X arm cavity alignment has changed by ~1.3 V. Assuming a full actuation range of 30 mrad for +/- 10 V, this implies that the pitch alignment of the stack has changed by ~2 mrad? Or maybe the suspension wires shifted in the standoff grooves by a small amount? This is ~x10 larger than the typical change imparted while working on the table, e.g. during a vent.

Main point is that this kind of range requirement should probably be factored in when thinking about the high-voltage coil driver actuation.


We unstuck ETMX by shaking the stack. Most effective was to apply large periodic human sized force to the north STACIS mounts.

  14744   Wed Jul 10 14:57:01 2019 KojiSummaryCDSChannel recipe for iscaux upgrade

The list of the iscaux channels and pin assignments were posted to google drive.
The spreadsheet can be viewable by the link sent to the 40m ML. It was shared with foteee@gmail for full access.


  • We need
    4 ADC modules
    5 DAC modules
    5 Binary I/O modules
  • Be aware that there are bundled multiple digital I/O channels such as "mbboDirect" and "mbbi".
  • The full db record of the new channels need to be inferred from the existing channels.

Necessary electronics modification

1. D990694 whitening filter modification (4 modules)

This module shares the fast and slow channels on the top DIN96pin (P1) connector. Also, the whitening selector (done by an analog signal per channel) is assigned over 17pin of the P1 connector, resulting in the necessity of the second DSUB cable. By migrating the fast channels, we can swap the cable from the P1 to P2.  Also, the whitening selectors are concentrated on the first Dsub. (See Attachment1 P1)

2. D040180 / D1500308 Common Mode Board

CM servo board itself doesn't need any modification. The CM board uses P1 and P2. So we need to manufacture a special connector for CM Board P2. (cf The adapter board for P1 T1800260). See also D1700058.

3. D990543A1 LSC Photodiode Interface

PD I/F board has the DC mon channels spread over the 16pin limit. P1 21A can be connected to 6A so that we can accommdate it in the first Dsub.
Also the board uses AD797s. This is not necessary. We can replace them to OP27s. I actually don't know what is happening to those bias control, temp mon, enable, and status. These features should be disables at the I/F and the PDs. (See Attachment2 P1)

Attachment 1: D990694-B.pdf
D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf D990694-B.pdf
Attachment 2: D990543A1.PDF
D990543A1.PDF D990543A1.PDF D990543A1.PDF
  14747   Thu Jul 11 12:42:35 2019 gautamSummaryCDSP2 interface board

I looked into the design of the P2 interface board. The main difficulty here is geometric - we have to somehow accommodate sufficient number of D-sub connectors in the tight space between the two P-type connectors. 

I think the least painful option is to stick with Johannes' design for the P1 connector. For the CM board, the P2 connector only uses 6 pairs of conductors for signals. So we can use a D-15 connector instead of 2 D-37 connectors. Then we can change the PCB shape such that the P1 connector can be accommodated (see Attachment #1). The other alternative would be to have 2 P-type connectors and 3 D-subs on the same PCB, but then we have to be extra careful about the relative positioning of the P-type connectors (otherwise they wont fit onto the Eurocrate). So I opted to still have two separate PCBs.

I took a first pass at the design, the files may be found here. I just auto-routed the connections, this is just an electrical feedthrough so I don't think we need to be too concerned about the PCB trace routing? If this looks okay, we should send out the piece for fab ASAP.

I will work on putting together the EPICS server machine (SuperMicro) this afternoon.


2. D040180 / D1500308 Common Mode Board

CM servo board itself doesn't need any modification. The CM board uses P1 and P2. So we need to manufacture a special connector for CM Board P2. (cf The adapter board for P1 T1800260). See also D1700058.

Attachment 1: IMG_7728.JPG
  14749   Thu Jul 11 13:08:36 2019 ChubSummaryCDSP2 interface board

It's nice and compact, and the cost of new 15-pin DSUB cables shouldn't be a factor here.  What does the 15p cable connect to?

  14750   Thu Jul 11 13:09:22 2019 gautam SummaryCDSP2 interface board

it will connect to a 15 pin breakout board in the Acromag chassis


It's nice and compact, and the cost of new 15-pin DSUB cables shouldn't be a factor here.  What does the 15p cable connect to?

  14754   Thu Jul 11 18:15:22 2019 gautamSummaryElectronicsPSL/IOO rack checkout

I looked at the PSL/IOO racks to check for which boards, if any, require an additional P2 interface, so that we can try and design a generic one for the IMC/CM boards and whatever else may require it. While searching the elog, I saw that Koji and Johannes had already done this, see Koji's elog in this thread. Some remarks:

  1. D990155 seems to be unused in both PSL and IOO racks. The one in the PSL rack has some LEMO cables plugged in to the front panel, but they go nowhere. So I think that both of these are redundant (in the assessment below, only one was marked redundant).
  2. In the PSL rack, the "TTFSS Interface", "PSL PMC SERVO", and "DAQ INTERFACE" (which I think is obsolete) cards all have their P2 connectors daisy chained together, going to a cross-connect. Kruthi and I traced this to be going to a cross connect marked "J23-PSLRACK-CCP". In the PSL wiring diagram of which we have a hardcopy in the control room, it looks like these channels are related to the RefCav? So I think this is not required to be interfaced to our new Acromag DAQ system. 

Conclusion: Only the IMC Servo and CM boards need their P2 connectors connected to Acromag.It would be helpful to remove the TTFSS Interface board and figure out what exactly the pin-mapping for the backplane connectors are, but I didn't do this today because there is a "High Voltage" line going to the Interface Board and I'm not actually sure of the signal chain for the FSS servo.

  14770   Thu Jul 18 00:51:52 2019 KojiSummaryCDSiscaux electronics modifications

Along with the plan in ELOG 14744, the ISC PD interface and the whitening filter board have been modificed. The ISC PD I/Fs were restored to the crate and the cables were connected. The whitening filteres are still on the electronics bench for some more tests before being returned to the crate.

The updated schematics were uploaded as https://dcc.ligo.org/D1900318 and https://dcc.ligo.org/D1900319

- Modification of the ISC PD interface: Jumpers between DIN96 P1 and P2. Replace all AD797s with OP27. In fact only I/F #1 (the left most)  had total 12 AD797 but the other units already had OP27s.

- Modification of the whitening filter: Jumpers between DIN96 P1 and P2.

Attachment 1: LSC_whitening2.jpg
Attachment 2: LSC_whitening.jpg
  14775   Thu Jul 18 22:34:40 2019 KojiSummaryCDSiscaux electronics modifications

The whitening filter modules have been restored to the crates. The SMA cables have been restored and fastened by a spanner. The ribbon cable to the antialiasing board was also connected. The backplane cables have not been moved from the upper DIN96 connector to the lower one.

Everything is expected to be good, but just keep eyes on the LSC signals as the boards were not quantitatvely tested yet. If you find something suspicious, report on the elog.

  14785   Sat Jul 20 11:57:39 2019 gautamSummaryCDSP2 interface board

The boards arrived. I soldered on a DIN96 connector, and tested that the goemetry will work. It does yes. The only constraint is that the P2 interface board has to be installed before the P1 interface is installed. Next step is to confirm that the pin-mapping is correct. The pin mapping from the DIN96 connector to the DB15 was also verified.

*Maybe it isn't obvious from the picture, but there shouldn't be any space constraint even with the DB37/DB15 cables connected to the respective adapter boards.

Attachment 1: IMG_7773.JPG
  14818   Tue Jul 30 20:11:12 2019 ranaSummaryIMCIMC ASC: thoughts and hopes

One of the biggest challenges in LIGO is reducing the alignment control noise. If you haven't worked on it for at least a few years, it probably seems like a trivial problem. But all versions of LIGO since 2001 have been limited by ASC noise below ~50 Hz.

I think the 40m IMC is a good testbed for us to try a few approaches towards mitigating this noise in LIGO. The following is a list of steps to take to get there:

  1. Using step responses and TF measurements, characterize the full existing system: SISO loop shapes, cross-couplings, and how diagnonal is the input and output matrices of the WFS. In principle, since we have 2 WFS in reflection and 1 DC QPD in the MC2 transmission, we should have full sensing of all angular DoFs.
  2. Check the correct operation of the WFS heads and the whole RF chain. We want the gains in the system to be such that either the shot noise or the RF electronics noise of the head is the limiting broadband noise in the system.
  3. Balancing the gains and phases of the demodulated signals is tricky, because we have no good reference. Should we use the JenneAM laser or the PSL beam?
  4. Estimate the coupling from the angular feedback signal to the IMC length noise using (1) sine wave injections for linear coupling, and (2) broadband noise for nonlinear coupling.
  5. We think the bilinear noise is due to the beam spot motion modulating the angle to length coupling as sensed by the laser beam. If this is true, we can increase the low frequency gain to minimize the beam spot motion (is this true?).
  6. By sinusoidally driving the mirror angles we can measure the instantaneous beam spot positions. We can then derive the matrix required to convert from our angular sensors (WFS + QPD) into beam spot motion. We should modify our IMC-WFS real-time model to give us DAQ channels which are beam spot estimators.
  7. Build a simulation of an IMC which has WFS, QPD, shot noise, and seismic noise.
  8. Use our optimal linear-feedback design tools to make Angular loops which minimize the bilinear noise coupling.
  9. Build a nonlinear controller (neural networks: dense + CNN) that outperforms the linear one by estimating the beam spot motion continuously and driving the cavity length to cancel the angle-to-length noise. 

I think that steps 1-6 are well within our existing experience, but we should do it anyway so as to reduce the IMC beam motion at low frequencies, and also to reduce the 10-100 Hz frequency noise as seen by the rest of the interferometer.

Steps 7-8 are medium hard, but we can get some help from the CSWG in tackling it.

Step is pretty tough, but I would like to try it and also get some help from MLWG and CSWG to address it.

  14829   Mon Aug 5 17:23:26 2019 gautamSummaryComputersWiFi Settings on asia

The VEA laptop asia was configured to be able to connect to too many WiFi networks - it was getting conflicted in its default position at the vertex and trying to hop between networks, for some reason trying to connect to networks that had poor signal strength. I deleted all options from the known networks except 40MARS. Now the network connection seems much more stable and reliable.

ELOG V3.1.3-