40m QIL Cryo_Lab CTN SUS_Lab TCS_Lab OMC_Lab CRIME_Lab FEA ENG_Labs OptContFac Mariner WBEEShop
  OMC elog, Page 9 of 9  Not logged in ELOG logo
New entries since:Wed Dec 31 16:00:00 1969
ID Date Authordown Type Category Subject
  412   Thu Jun 23 21:03:33 2022 KojiFacilityGeneralMoving the small optical table to CAML (TCS Lab)

I've cleared the small optical table and wondered how to move it out of the room. Fortunately, the north side of the big table had wide enough clearance and let the 36" wide table go through. This was easy without moving other heavy stuff.

From here to the door, a bit of work is required. A possibility is to roll the laser blocking wall to the south side of the big table. This will require moving the shelving in the entrance area but it's not a lot of work compared to disassembling a part of the wall.

If this does not work somehow, we will consider removing the last panel of the wall and it will definitely allow the table to get out from the door.

Attachment 1: PXL_20220624_035628602.jpg
PXL_20220624_035628602.jpg
  413   Tue Jun 28 16:13:34 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralThe small optical table not small enough to get out

The table width was an inch too large compared to the door width. We need to tilt the table and it seemed too much for us. Let's ask the transportation for handling.

Photo courtesy by Juan

Attachment 1: IMG-5203.jpg
IMG-5203.jpg
  414   Fri Jul 15 22:14:14 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC Lab recovery for the OMC #002 test

- The lab is chilly (18degC)

- Cleaned the lab and the optical table a bit so that the delicate work can be done. The diode test rig (borrowed from Downs - see OMC ELOG 408 and OMC ELOG 409) was removed from the table and brought to the office (to return on Monday)

- The rack electronics were energized.

- The OMC mirrors in use were returned to the cases and stored in the plastic box.

- The optical table was also cleaned. Removed the old Al foils. The table was wiped with IPA

- The OMC #4 was moved to the other part of the table, and then OMC #2 was placed in the nominal place (Attachment 1). Note that the "legs" were migrated from #4 to #2. There are three poles that defines the location of the OMC Transportation

- The lid was removed and the OMC was inspected (Attachment 2). Immediately found some more delamination of the epoxy beneath the cable bracket (Attachment 3). This needs to be taken care of before shipment.

- The cavity was already flashing as usual, and a bit of alignment made the TEM00 flashing.

- The locking was a little tricky because the LB unit seemed to have a gain-dependent offset. After some adjustment, robust locks were achieved. The cavity was then finely adjusted. Attachment 4 shows the CCD image of the reflection. The core of the spot is more or less axisymmetric as usual. There is also a large helo around the spot. I was not aware of this before. I may need to wipe some of the mirrors of the input path.

- As the satisfactory lock was achieved, I called a day by taking a picture of the table (Attachment 5).

Attachment 1: PXL_20220716_035922673.jpg
PXL_20220716_035922673.jpg
Attachment 2: PXL_20220716_025319391.MP.jpg
PXL_20220716_025319391.MP.jpg
Attachment 3: PXL_20220716_025334324.jpg
PXL_20220716_025334324.jpg
Attachment 4: PXL_20220716_035309066.jpg
PXL_20220716_035309066.jpg
Attachment 5: PXL_20220716_035411435.NIGHT.jpg
PXL_20220716_035411435.NIGHT.jpg
  415   Mon Jul 18 14:20:09 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Plan Portal

== Initial Preparation ==

  • [Done] OMC #002 placement
  • [Done] OMC #002 locking
  • Details OMC ELOG 414

== Measurements ==

  • [Done] Transmission / Power budget before FirstContact OMC ELOG 416
  • [Done] Transmission / Power budget after FirstContact OMC ELOG 417
  • [Done] Backscatter measurement with a new deflection optics
    • [Done] Optics bonding done waiting for cure OMC ELOG 420 -> Returned the bond to Madeline OMC ELOG 424
    • [Done] Backscatter measurement
      • Measurement: 0.6 ppm OMC ELOG 422
      • (Transmission is 10~60mW. If the backscatter is the order of 1ppm or less, we expect the light level is ~10nW. Can we really detect it? How? ... OK... last time the measurement has been done with the stick PD type powermeter with baffles and the room light turned off (OMC ELOG 209). So it's not totally crazy.)
  • [Done] High QE PD preparation / install / QE check
    • [Done] High QE PD inventory check
      • A1-23    LLO OMC#001
      • A1-25    LLO OMC#001
      • B1-01    LHO OMC#003
      • B1-16    LHO OMC#003
      • B1-22    @CIT Cage B1 Cleaned/Installed
      • B1-23    @CIT Cage B2 Cleaned/Installed
      • C1-03    @CIT Cage B3 Cleaned
      • C1-05    Dead / CIT contamination test cav
      • C1-07    Dead / CIT contamination test cav
      • C1-08    @CIT Cage C2
      • C1-09    @CIT Cage C3
      • C1-10    @CIT Cage C4
      • C1-11    @CIT Cage D1
      • C1-12    @CIT Cage D2
      • C1-14    @CIT Cage D3
      • C1-15    Dead / CIT Cage D4
      • C1-17    LHO Spare
      • C1-21    LHO Spare
      • D1-08    not @CIT, maybe LLO Spare?
      • D1-10    not @CIT, maybe LLO Spare?
    • [Done] Install & QE check
  • [Done] Fiber input beam characterization OMC ELOG 421

== Repair / Preparation ==


== Shipping ==

  • [Done] Tools to ship to LLO OMC ELOG 448
    • CLASS B special tool kit (Allens / Pliers / Mighty-Mouse spanner / Spatula / etc)
    • FC kit
    • Electronic kit (PD connector / trans-impedance amp)
    • Spare High QE PDs
    • Power meters
    • Glass Beamdumps (for optical testing)
    • Cable bracket replacement kit (PEEK cable bracket / cable pegs / fastners / spare fasteners / kapton sheet / cable ties)
    • Emergency EP30-2 kit (excluding the bond)
       
  • [Done] OMC Pelican Filling (Stephen) / OMC Outerbox/insulation (Stephen/Downs) / OMC Shipment Aug 29, 2022 OMC ELOG 445

 

  416   Tue Jul 19 03:17:56 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Power Budget before mirror cleaning

o Power Budget (2022/07/18)
NPRO ADJ -50 (min)
Fiber incident 62.8mW
Fiber output 45.1mW
Matching to the fiber 72%


DCPD T =  8.90  +/- 0.01  mW
REFPD  =  3.760  +/- 0.001 V

DCPD R =  8.82  +/- 0.01  V
REFPD  =  3.760 +/- 0.001 V

CM1    =  81.4  +/- 0.1   uW
REFPD  =  3.767 +/- 0.001 V

CM2    =  86.6  +/- 0.1   uW
REFPD  =  3.767 +/- 0.001 V

REFLPD
OFS    = -6.214 +/- 0.001 mV (beam blocked)
OFS_REF= +4.587mV

LOCKED =  57.5  +/- 0.5   mV
REFPD  =  3.970 +/- 0.003 V

UNLOCK =  2.816 +/- 0.003 V
REFPD  =  3.943 +/- 0.001 V

P_Inc  =  20.04 +/- 0.01  mW
REFPD  =  3.946 +/- 0.001 V
 


Analysis Result

- Cavity coupling 0.989 (1.1% junk&sidebands)

- Cavity R&T: R=756ppm, T=0.946
- OMC Throughput (Cavity T x First BS R): T=0.939
- Cavity loss per mirror 90 ppm / Round Trip Loss 432ppm

 

  417   Thu Jul 21 02:55:06 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Power Budget after mirror cleaning

o Power Budget after FirstContact cleaning (2022/07/20)
NPRO ADJ -50 (min)
Fiber incident --.-mW
Fiber output --.-mW
Matching to the fiber ??%



DCPD T =  8.62  +/- 0.01  mW
REFPD  =  3.549  +/- 0.001 V

DCPD R =  9.46  +/- 0.01  V
REFPD  =  3.562 +/- 0.001 V

CM1    =  74.5  +/- 0.1   uW
REFPD  =  3.585 +/- 0.001 V

CM2    =  81.7  +/- 0.1   uW
REFPD  =  3.585 +/- 0.001 V

REFLPD
vOFS    = -6.197 +/- 0.001 mV (beam blocked)
vOFS_REF= +4.58mV

LOCKED =  47.6  +/- 0.2   mV
REFPD  =  3.596 +/- 0.003 V

UNLOCK =  2.700 +/- 0.003 V
REFPD  =  3.590 +/- 0.001 V

P_Inc  =  19.36 +/- 0.001  mW
REFPD  =  3.594 +/- 0.001 V


Analysis Result

- Cavity coupling 0.980 (2.0% junk&sidebands)

- Cavity R&T: R=229ppm, T=0.970 (previous T=0.946, 2.4% UP!)
- OMC Throughput (Cavity T x First BS R): T=0.963
- Cavity loss per mirror 42.8 ppm / Round Trip Loss 238ppm

  418   Thu Jul 21 13:21:27 2022 KojiGeneralConfigurationWindows laptop for WincamD Beam'R2 recovery

The Windows laptop for WincamD/Beam'R2 (DELL Vostro3300) was not functional.
- Windows 7 got stuck in the starting up process (Google "startup repair loop")
- The battery can't charge and the adapter connection is flaky

I decided to newly install Win10.
I made a new bootable Win10 DVD from the ISO downloaded from IMSS. The ISO file was converted to CDR using Disk Utility on Mac.
This deleted the past disk partitions. The installation process has no trouble and Win10 ran successfully. The machine is slow but still acceptable for our purpose.
Dataray Version 7.1H25Bk was downloaded from the vendor website https://dataray.com/blogs/software/downloads and installed successfully.
The devices ran as expected by connecting the heads and selecting the proper device in the software.

Then, the Win10 fell into "Hibernation Loop" and "Shutdown loop" (after disabling hibernation in the safe mode).
This is probably the combination of extremely slow windows update (feature update i.e. beta OS update) and the occasional shutdown due to the flakiness of the AC connection

Win10 was reinstalled and automatic Win update was disabled via windows policy manager or something like that. Still, it tries to download and update some of the updates (what's happening there!?

Here are my strong recommendations on how to use this laptop

  • Do not use any network connection. It will enable Windows Update kicks in and destroy the machine.
  • Use a USB stick for data transportation if necessary
  • Buy a replacement battery (maybe a 3rd-party cheap one
  • The Win10 DVD should always be inserted into the laptop's drive so that we can reinstall the windows anytime.
Attachment 1: IMG_1102.JPG
IMG_1102.JPG
  419   Thu Jul 21 14:35:35 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralBond reinforcement blocks for the invar brackets

Bond reinforcement blocks for the invar brackets:

  • Attachment 1: CLASS A glass prisms (the surplus of the 2016 repair)
  • Attachment 2: Dirty reiforcement bars made of Aluminum
  • There are also many dirty prisms in the kit obtained from Stephen
Attachment 1: IMG_1095.JPG
IMG_1095.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1091.JPG
IMG_1091.JPG
  420   Thu Jul 21 14:55:48 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOptics bonding for the backscatter measurement

The backscatter beam is supposed to appear in the backpropagation path. The transmission of the OMC has a couple of optics, it's not easy to access that beam.
To try to deflect the beam either horizontally or vertically, small optical pieces were made. (Attachment)

These are the combination of the optics

- Thorlabs PF05-03 Fused Silica Mirror Blank (dia12.7mm x t 6.0mm) + Thorlabs 1/2"sq BB Dielectric Mirror BBSQ05-E03

- Thorlabs PF05-03 Fused Silica Mirror Blank (dia12.7mm x t 6.0mm) + Thorlabs ME05-G01 Protected Al Mirror (dia12.7mm x t 3.2mm) + Thorlabs MRA10-K13 Right-Angle Prism Nd:YAG 10mm

Torr seal was used as the bonding epoxy. It uses a 1:2 volume mixture (not easy because of the viscosity) and is relatively fast to cure (in a couple of hours).
The test piece showed some softness after 3~4 hours so I left the parts cured overnight at room temp (i.e. 18degC)

Attachment 1: IMG_1098.JPG
IMG_1098.JPG
  421   Thu Jul 21 17:47:00 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralThe profile of the beam incident on the fiber input coupler

The profile of the beam incident on the fiber input

The fiber input was deflected by a 45deg mirror. The beam profile was measured with WincamD. The beam was too strong (~60mW) even at the smallest pump power (ADJ -50) of the NPRO. So the two ND20 filters were added to the lens right before the 45 deg mirror and the camera.

The measured profile had some deviation from the nice TEM00 particularly around the waist. This could be a problem of the too small beam on the ND filter and the CCD.
This is not an issue as we just want to know the approximate shape of the beam.

For the fiber coupling, if we have the beam waist radius of ~200um it is sufficient for decent coupling.

Attachment 1: fiber_beam_profile.pdf
fiber_beam_profile.pdf
  422   Fri Jul 22 00:31:17 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 backscatter measurement

Measure the power ratio between the forward-propagating and reverse-propagating beams.

  1. Place a small deflecting mirror at the transmission.
  2. Place a flat mirror at the deflected transmission. When the alignment of this mirror is adjusted to retroreflect this beam, the DC of the cavity reflection PD increases, and also the CCD shows spurious fringes.
  3. This condition allows us to locate the power meter at the reverse-propagating spot of the transmission (Attachment 1)
  4. Place a black glass beam dump for the main (bright) transmission (Attachment 2)
  5. Now the power meter is receiving the counter-propagating beam. Turn off the room light and place an anodized Al baffle as shown in Attachment 2. Move the baffle to block only the counter-propagating. Move the baffle out. => Record the power meter reading with/without the baffle in the counter-propagating path. The difference is the power of the reverse-propagating beam.
  6. Now measure the power of the reflected main transmission. This tells us the power ratio between the foward- and back-propagating beams.
  7. Remove the small deflecting mirror and measure the power of the main transmission.
  8. Now the back-propagating power can be estimated from 6 and 7. The same amount is going back to the IFO path.
  9. The reflectivity can be calculated from the 7 and the transmission

- To increase the incident laser power, NPRO Current ADJ was set to be 0 (increased from -50)

- 1st:  Without the baffle 0.373 +/- 0.001 uW / With the baffle 0.318 +/- 0.001 uW
- 2nd: Without the baffle 0.370 +/- 0.001 uW / With the baffle 0.318 +/- 0.001 uW
- 3rd: Without the baffle 0.370 +/- 0.001 uW / With the baffle 0.317 +/- 0.001 uW

==> 53.3 +/- 0.6 nW

- The main transmission was 84.0mW
==> Backpropagation ratio was 0.634+/-0.007 ppm

- Direct measurement of the OMC was  after BS 96.6mW
==> Backpropagation power from the cavity: 61.3 +/- 0.7 nW

- Cavity transmission for the matched beam is Tcav RinputBS = 0.963
==> Incident resonant TEM00 power 100.3mW

- Reflection 61.3+/-0.7 nW x RinputBS = 60.8+/-0.7 nW
-> The effective reflectivity for the mode-matched resonant TEM00 beam incident on the OMC (1st steering mirror) is 0.606+/-0.007 ppm

Attachment 1: OMC_backscatter.pdf
OMC_backscatter.pdf OMC_backscatter.pdf
  423   Fri Jul 22 17:41:01 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralSRS LCR meter SRS720 returned to Downs

SRS LCR meter SRS720 was returned to Downs as before.

 

Attachment 1: PXL_20220723_002330805.jpg
PXL_20220723_002330805.jpg
  424   Fri Jul 22 17:47:38 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralC&B request for the reinforcement blocks

OMC Reinforcement blocks

1. P/N D1600316; Version v4; Type 01; Qty 30; Source Chemistry Machine Shop
2. P/N D1600316; Version v4; Type 02; Qty 15; Source Chemistry Machine Shop
3. P/N D1600316; Version v4; Type 01; Qty 40; Source Resource MFG PO S422806
4. P/N D1600316; Version v4; Type 02; Qty 40; Source Resource MFG PO S422806

Stephen asked Srinath for the ICS entry.
Stephen made the C&B request https://cleanandbake.ligo.caltech.edu/clean_and_bake/request/1708/

Madeline was asked to take care of the C&B.

Also, the Torr Seal box was returned to Madeline.

Attachment 1: PXL_20220722_222013127.jpg
PXL_20220722_222013127.jpg
  425   Mon Jul 25 18:25:04 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralA/C Filter was replaced
New filter PN
Grainger
TK70457312T Mini-Pleat Air Filter, Style - Air Filters Box, Performance Rating MERV 14, Nominal Filter Size 12x24x2
 
Previous filter PN
Global Industrial Equipment
Extended Surface Pleated Cartridge Filter Serva-Cell Mp4 Slmp295 12X24X2 Gl WBB431699
-> No longer available
  426   Tue Jul 26 00:01:59 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 delamination check 2

More epoxy delamination check:

DCPD R (Attachment 1): Found half delaminated

DCPD T (Attachment 2): Found half delaminated

QPD1/QPD2 (Attachment 3): Looks fine

------

In total we need to fix bonding of three invar bases (including the one for the cable bracket)

Attachment 1: IMG_1106.JPG
IMG_1106.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1107.JPG
IMG_1107.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1110.JPG
IMG_1110.JPG
  427   Tue Jul 26 00:12:58 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralHigh QE PD: QE measurements

- Installed the High QE PDs to OMC #002

  • B1-22@Cage B1 was installed to the transmission DCPD
  • B1-23@Cage B1 was installed to the reflection DCPD

Upon the installation, the legs of the PDs were cut by 3mm. Also, the tab of the PD could not be embedded in the DCPD housing. Therefore, the tabs were cut.

The alignment looked just fine. The weak reflections are directed to the black glass beam dumps.

- After the installation, the QEs were measured.

  • With Thorlabs S130C power meter, the QE was estimated to be ~95%. (Accuracy +/-7%)
  • With Thorlabs S401C power meter, the QE was estimated to be ~100%. (Accuracy +/-3%)

It is so confusing. So I decided to make the QE test setup.


Ophir RM9 with chopper (+/-5%): 8.97mW
Thorlabs S140C integrating sphere (+/-7%): 9.11mW
Thorlabs S130C PD power meter (+/-7%): 9.15mW
Thorlabs S401C thermal power meter (+/-3%): 8.90mW
So there looks ~3% discrepancy between S130C and S401C

Then tried to measure the QE of C1-03@Cage B3 with Ophir RM9
- Initial state: QE=0.95
- First FirstContact application: QE went up to 0.973
- Second FirstContact application: QE = 0.974, basically no change


To Do:
- Calibrate the trans-impedance amp with Keithley
- Apply FC to B1-22 and B1-23 to see if there is an improvement
- The power should be measured with S401C because the accuracy seems better (+/-3%).
- Take photos of the PD FC process

General To Do:

- Backscatter test 2nd trial

- Start applying the first contact to the optical surfaces
- Beam dump cleaning
- Apply FC cap to the PDs
- Delamination repair (light side)
- Delamination repair (dark side)
- Cable bracket replace (dark side)

 

Attachment 1: IMG_1118.JPG
IMG_1118.JPG
  428   Wed Jul 27 10:09:51 2022 KojiGeneralGeneral4+4 wire clamp in hand

Regarding: D1200971

- 4 CLASS A wire clamp obtained from the OMC spare
- 4 more DIRTY wire clamp obtained from WB experiments (they no longer use these)

Once the later ones are C&Bed, we have enough.

 

Attachment 1: PXL_20220727_072154009.jpg
PXL_20220727_072154009.jpg
  429   Wed Jul 27 10:34:09 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralHigh QE PD: QE measurements 2

- DLPCA-200 trans-impedance amplifier was calibrated.
  Keithley source meter 2450 was connected to the amp. Provide current and read the output voltage with the precision digital voltage meter (Agilent/Keysight).
  Gain: 999.7V/A@7mA, 999.6V/A@8mA

- From the power meter spec, Thorlabs S401C seemed the best (+/-3%). So the QEs of the 9 PDs were checked with this power meter again.

- All PDs exhibited the QE of 0.95~0.96. It's all relative as the power meter has a systematic error.
- Tried to clean B1-22 and B1-23 PDs. They didn't show significant improvement after the cleaning. To avoid the unnecessary risk of damaging the PDs, further cleaning was not performed. (Some photos were attached)

- What we can do is use this result as the relative measurements.
- For OMC#2, B1-22 is the DCPD(T) and B1-23 is the DCPD(R). C1-03 and C1-12 are the spares, according to this latest result.
- At LLO, we track down the source of the throughput reduction (-10%). The QEs of the PDs are going to be tested in the same setup at once to compare their PDs and our PDs.

PD Type SN Case DCV1 Pin [mW] dPin [mW] Power Meter DCV2 Avg(DCV) Std(DCV) DCVOFS (mV) Responsivity [A/W] dR QE dQE Date Note
IGHQEX3000 B1-22 B1 7.734 9.43 0.02 TL 401C 7.745 7.7395 0.006 -0.0260 0.821 0.002 0.957 0.002 July 26, 2022 clean1 / installed (T)
IGHQEX3000 B1-23 B2 7.679 9.26 0.02 TL 401C 7.709 7.6940 0.015 -0.0220 0.831 0.002 0.969 0.003 July 26, 2022 clean1 / installed (R)
IGHQEX3000 C1-03 B3 7.775 9.40 0.02 TL 401C 7.770 7.7725 0.003 -0.0450 0.827 0.002 0.964 0.002 July 26, 2022 clean3
                                 
IGHQEX3000 C1-08 C2 7.717 9.45 0.02 TL 401C 7.750 7.7335 0.017 -0.0430 0.819 0.002 0.954 0.003 July 26, 2022 initial
IGHQEX3000 C1-09 C3 7.737 9.50 0.05 TL 401C 7.776 7.7565 0.019 -0.0580 0.817 0.005 0.952 0.006 July 26, 2022 initial
IGHQEX3000 C1-10 C4 7.757 9.50 0.03 TL 401C 7.774 7.7655 0.009 -0.0650 0.818 0.003 0.953 0.003 July 26, 2022 initial
                                 
IGHQEX3000 C1-11 D1 7.826 9.66 0.01 TL 401C 7.828 7.8270 0.001 -0.0570 0.810 0.001 0.945 0.001 July 26, 2022 initial
IGHQEX3000 C1-12 D2 7.841 9.51 0.02 TL 401C 7.841 7.8410 0.000 -0.0410 0.825 0.002 0.961 0.002 July 26, 2022 initial
IGHQEX3000 C1-14 D3 7.769 9.55 0.01 TL 401C 7.789 7.7790 0.010 -0.0520 0.815 0.001 0.950 0.002 July 26, 2022 initial
Attachment 1: IMG_1119.JPG
IMG_1119.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1120.JPG
IMG_1120.JPG
  430   Wed Jul 27 10:34:30 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Protective FirstContact Paint

The optical surfaces were coated with FirstContact to keep them clean / somewhat protected during the transportation.
The PD aperture was sealed with FirstContact "caps" (made by Kate in 2016?).

Attachment 1: IMG_1125.JPG
IMG_1125.JPG
  431   Wed Jul 27 23:52:18 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Cable bracket replacement (1)

Parts check

- D1300052-V3 SN001 is going to be used (Attachment 1)

- This is the PEEK version of the cable bracket (Attachment 2). The side thread holes have no Helicoils inserted. This needs to be done!
 

Connector arrangement check / cable routing check

Attachment 3: Connector Arrangement from the Northside

Attachment 4: Connector Arrangement from the South side

Attachment 5: Cable routing (Northside down)

At this point, the delamination of the V shape beam dumps was visible. This is the subject of bonding reinforcement.

Attachment 1: IMG_1126.JPG
IMG_1126.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1135.JPG
IMG_1135.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1127.JPG
IMG_1127.JPG
Attachment 4: IMG_1129.JPG
IMG_1129.JPG
Attachment 5: IMG_1130.JPG
IMG_1130.JPG
  432   Thu Jul 28 00:28:15 2022 KojiGeneralGeneral OMC #002 Cable bracket replacement (2)

Connector unmounting

- (Attachment 1) The connector nut rings were removed using an angled needle nose plier. The connector shell has a tight dimension relative to the hole on the bracket. But of course, they could be extracted.

- The 4 screws mounting the bracket to the invar blocks were successfully removed. No extra damage to the bonding.

- (Attachment 2) The plan was to remove the cable pegs by unfastening the button head 1/4-20 screws from the bracket and then just replace the bracket with the new one. However, these screws were really tight. The two were successfully removed without cutting the PEEK cable ties. Two cable ties were necessary to be cut to detach the bracket+pegs from the fragile OMC. Then one screw was removed. However, the final one could not be unfastened. This is not a problem as we are not going to recycle the metal cable bracket... as long as we have spare parts for the new bracket.

- (Attachment 3) Right now, the new bracket is waiting for the helicoils to be inserted. So the OMC lid was closed with the cables piled up. Just be careful when the lid is open.

Attachment 1: IMG_1132.JPG
IMG_1132.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1133.JPG
IMG_1133.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1136.JPG
IMG_1136.JPG
  433   Thu Jul 28 00:46:47 2022 KojiGeneralGeneral Subject: OMC #002 Cable bracket replacement (3)

Checking the spare parts

- Conclusion for OMC#2: need PEEK cable ties
- for more OMCs: need more BHCS / PEEK cable ties / Helicoils

  • Helicoils: 1/4-20 0.375 helicoils / Qty 4 / Class A (Attachment 1)
    • looks like there are many more as the transport fixture bags (Attachment 2). Stephen noted that they are meant to be CLASS B
       
  • Cable pegs: D1300057 / Qty 24 + 3 recycled from OMC#2 / Class A (Attachment 3)
    • Requirement: 3+3+4 = 10 for the 4th OMC / 3x4 =12 for the cable bracket replacement -> we have enough
       
  • PEEK Cable Ties: Stephen reported they were deformed by baking heat... did not check how they are in the bags.
     
  • Button Head Cap Screws 1/4-20 length ? none found in the bags.
    • Qty 4 spare (forgot to take a picture) + 3 recycled. So we have sufficient for OMC#2
Attachment 1: IMG_1137.JPG
IMG_1137.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1148.JPG
IMG_1148.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1138.JPG
IMG_1138.JPG
  434   Wed Aug 10 18:42:27 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Cable bracket replacement (4)

[Stephen Koji]

Now we got the C&Bed parts to continue to work on the cable bracket replacement.

1) Helicoil insertion

1/4-20 Helicoils were inserted into the 6 thread holes of D1300052. It went mostly okay. We witnessed that the Helicoil insertion tool delaminated the plating of the Helicoils upon insertion (Attachment 1). Stephen mentioned that this is not usual, but we didn't find anything further such as increased friction, more debris, etc. So we decided to go forward.

2) EP30-2 Kit

The EP30-2 kit was transferred from the 40m clean room to the OMC lab. The EP30-2 kit tracking was updated via C1900343

3) D1300052 reinstallation -> FAIL

Now resumed to the installation of D1300052 bracket. However, the hole size of the bracket is just a bit too small compared with the size of the mighty mouse connectors. It was already quite tight with the metal version. However, this PEEK version seems to have 0.1 mm further small diameter, and then the connectors do not penetrate the holes. The plan could be
1) Use a razor blade to shave the hole inner circle.
2) Use a cleaned drill bit to make the hole size 0.2mm bigger.

Attachment 1: PXL_20220809_235457354.jpg
PXL_20220809_235457354.jpg
Attachment 2: PXL_20220811_011910569.jpg
PXL_20220811_011910569.jpg
Attachment 3: PXL_20220811_013746139.jpg
PXL_20220811_013746139.jpg
  435   Thu Aug 11 15:24:57 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Cable bracket replacement (5)

- The hole size extension is going forwared now.

- Madeline and Chub are cleaning (sonicating) a drill (29/64=0.4531")
- The parts in a bag were brought to the 40m C&B lab.

- The hole is going to be 11mil=0.28mm larger than the recommendation (0.442").
  It's not a D-hole. The connector has a rounded-rectangular flange that fits into the PEEK parts.
  So I don't think it's an issue.

- Chub has a proper spanner to fasten the nuts. We want to use it here and LLO.

 

  436   Mon Aug 15 21:31:56 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Cable bracket replacement (6)

The cable bracket was successfully replaced.

  • Looking from the QPD side (North side in Attachment 1), the connectors for the DCPDs and PZT are sticking out, and the ones for QPDs are sticking to the other side. So only two rectangular holes (for QPDs) are facing north.
    • Top left is DCPDT
    • Top right is DCPDR
    • Bottom center is PZT
    • Bottom left is QPD (far/long)
    • Bottom right is QPD (near/short)
       
  • First, the cable pegs for the short sides are fastened with the original screws (Vented BHCS 1/4-20).
  • Then, the cables are started to be inserted from the bottom so that the nuts can be rotated with the spanner. The spanner helped a bit but the nut only has two positions to hook the spanner and the clearance is not sufficient to insert the spanner when one of the hook positions is facing the bottom. The enlarged hole (29/64") perfectly worked . The flange of the connector can be held with a rectangular hole, so a bit bigger hole than the connector size was not an issue. Finally, all the cables were attached to the bracket.
  • The bracket has not yet been fixed on the OMC breadboard yet. This was done with the four screws from the top. Along with the assembly document E1300201, the fastening torque was limited to 2 in-lb using a digital torque wrench.
  • Attachment 2 shows the view from the "North" side. Attachment 3 shows the view from the "South" side. The cables were not yet tied on the cable pegs on the long side of the bracket.
Attachment 1: IMG_1155.JPG
IMG_1155.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1149.JPG
IMG_1149.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1150.JPG
IMG_1150.JPG
  437   Mon Aug 15 22:06:18 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 new cable tie installed

[Stephen Koji]

New cable ties were installed on the cable pegs attached to the long sides of the cable bracket.

 

Attachment 1: IMG_1929.JPG
IMG_1929.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1930.JPG
IMG_1930.JPG
  438   Mon Aug 15 22:43:35 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Delamination repair Part1 (1)

[Stephen Koji]

Checked the delamination status:

  • The Invar bar on the cable bracket (DCPD side): Almost all delaminated (Attachment 1 left)
  • The invar bar on the cable bracket (QPD side): Rims still intact, center delaminated (Attachment 1 right)
  • The invar bar reinforced in 2016: One of the reinforcement bar half delaminated (Attachment 2)
Attachment 1: IMG_1926.JPG
IMG_1926.JPG
Attachment 2: PXL_20220816_011346581.jpg
PXL_20220816_011346581.jpg
  439   Mon Aug 15 22:49:03 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Delamination repair Part1 (2)

EP30-2 preparation

  • Two Al foil cups + A sheet of Al foil (for test cure)
  • Set a tube on the glue gun
  • Attach an applicator tube
  • Push a couple of times, and dispense the glue for a single stroke on a waste Al cup
  • Pour the 6g of glue to the other cup.
  • Add 0.3g of silica beads powder to the cup
  • Steer. Pick a few drops to the test cure Al foil
  • Bake the test piece for 15min in 200F (95degC) ==> Very good

#1 The Invar bar on the cable bracket (DCPD side)

Added short (frosted) Al bars (Attachment 1) to the short sides of the invar bar. (Attachments 2/3). Some glue was sucked into the delamination gap by capillary action (=good) (Attachment 4)

#2 The Invar bar on the cable bracket (QPD side)

Added short (frosted) Al bars to the short sides of the invar bar. (Attachments 3/5). Maybe some glue was sucked into the delamination gap??? Not so clear. (Attachment 4)

#3 The Invar bar reinforced in 2016

Added a short (frosted) Al bars to a short side of the invar bar (Attachment 6). On both sides of the 2016 reinforcement, rectangular prisms are added (Attachment 6)
Some capillary action is visible beneath the invar bar (Attachment 7)


Leave it as it is for a day

 

Attachment 1: PXL_20220816_011256007.jpg
PXL_20220816_011256007.jpg
Attachment 2: PXL_20220816_020441901.MP.jpg
PXL_20220816_020441901.MP.jpg
Attachment 3: PXL_20220816_022033189.jpg
PXL_20220816_022033189.jpg
Attachment 4: PXL_20220816_022234784.jpg
PXL_20220816_022234784.jpg
Attachment 5: PXL_20220816_020415355.jpg
PXL_20220816_020415355.jpg
Attachment 6: PXL_20220816_022108122.jpg
PXL_20220816_022108122.jpg
Attachment 7: PXL_20220816_022244417.jpg
PXL_20220816_022244417.jpg
  440   Wed Aug 24 02:51:23 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Delamination repair Part1 (3)

Inspection of the bonding on the suspension interface side. All look good.

Attachment 1: IMG_1156.JPG
IMG_1156.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1157.JPG
IMG_1157.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1158.JPG
IMG_1158.JPG
Attachment 4: IMG_1159.JPG
IMG_1159.JPG
Attachment 5: IMG_1160.JPG
IMG_1160.JPG
Attachment 6: IMG_1161.JPG
IMG_1161.JPG
Attachment 7: IMG_1162.JPG
IMG_1162.JPG
Attachment 8: IMG_1163.JPG
IMG_1163.JPG
  441   Wed Aug 24 02:53:46 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Delamination repair Part2 (1)

Inspection of the delaminations in the optics side

Attachment 1: IMG_1168.JPG
IMG_1168.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1169.JPG
IMG_1169.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1170.JPG
IMG_1170.JPG
Attachment 4: IMG_1171.JPG
IMG_1171.JPG
Attachment 5: IMG_1175.JPG
IMG_1175.JPG
  442   Wed Aug 24 02:57:43 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralEP30-2 bonding setup

EP30-2 bonding setup

Attachment 1: IMG_1178.JPG
IMG_1178.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1179.JPG
IMG_1179.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1180.JPG
IMG_1180.JPG
  443   Wed Aug 24 03:20:59 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Delamination repair Part2 (2)

Bonding

Attachment 1: IMG_1182.JPG
IMG_1182.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1183.JPG
IMG_1183.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1184.JPG
IMG_1184.JPG
Attachment 4: IMG_1185.JPG
IMG_1185.JPG
Attachment 5: IMG_1186.JPG
IMG_1186.JPG
Attachment 6: IMG_1187.JPG
IMG_1187.JPG
Attachment 7: IMG_1188.JPG
IMG_1188.JPG
Attachment 8: IMG_1189.JPG
IMG_1189.JPG
Attachment 9: IMG_1190.JPG
IMG_1190.JPG
Attachment 10: IMG_1191.JPG
IMG_1191.JPG
Attachment 11: IMG_1193.JPG
IMG_1193.JPG
  444   Wed Aug 24 03:26:43 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 Delamination repair Part2 (3)

Inspection

 

Attachment 1: IMG_1199.JPG
IMG_1199.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_1200.JPG
IMG_1200.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_1201.JPG
IMG_1201.JPG
Attachment 4: IMG_1202.JPG
IMG_1202.JPG
Attachment 5: IMG_1203.JPG
IMG_1203.JPG
Attachment 6: IMG_1204.JPG
IMG_1204.JPG
Attachment 7: IMG_1205.JPG
IMG_1205.JPG
Attachment 8: IMG_1206.JPG
IMG_1206.JPG
  445   Wed Aug 24 11:29:47 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralOMC #002 ready for shipment

[Stephen Koji]

The OMC #002 is ready for shipment.

Attachment 1: Work done on Sept 19, 2022

Other attachments: Putting the OMC in the pelican case.

Attachment 1: IMG_1207.JPG
IMG_1207.JPG
Attachment 2: PXL_20220825_004259850.jpg
PXL_20220825_004259850.jpg
Attachment 3: PXL_20220825_004307204.jpg
PXL_20220825_004307204.jpg
Attachment 4: PXL_20220825_005423342.jpg
PXL_20220825_005423342.jpg
Attachment 5: PXL_20220825_005549985.jpg
PXL_20220825_005549985.jpg
  446   Thu Aug 25 14:22:08 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralLLO OMC #001 Ballast Mass investigation

Inspected the past LLO add-on mass configuration.

There are unknown masses at the DCPD side. It looks like a small SS mass with an estimated mass of 5g. But the DCC number is unknown.

We are going to add 10g on each corner as well as the damping aterial. We should be able to figure out the fastener / mass configuration.

Attachment 1: DSCN0917.JPG
DSCN0917.JPG
Attachment 2: DSCN0922.JPG
DSCN0922.JPG
Attachment 3: P6108705.JPG
P6108705.JPG
Attachment 4: P6108707.JPG
P6108707.JPG
Attachment 5: P6108706.JPG
P6108706.JPG
  447   Thu Aug 25 20:05:00 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralLLO OMC #001 Ballast Mass investigation

Here is the balance mass info for the LLO OMC#001 analyzed from the photographs

  • Added masses are: 50+10g, 50+20, 10+20+5, and 20+20+10 for the mass right above FM1/CM1/FM2 and CM2, respectively.
  • The length of the 1/4-20 screws seem L=3/4"~1"

If we attach the additional mass, longer 1/4-20 screws (1", 1" 1/8, 1" 1/4) are going to be used.

Attachment 1: balance_mass_config_LLO.pdf
balance_mass_config_LLO.pdf
  448   Fri Aug 26 22:29:02 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralTool Shipping Prep

Shipping preparation for the LLO trip

Started July 15, 2022 and finished Aug 30. So it took ~1.5 months (with a couple weeks of break)


Class B special tools

  • Screw Drivers 1
    • https://www.steritool.com/
    • https://www.steritool.com/precision-screwdrivers-mini.aspx
  • Screw Drivers 2
    • What I have seems S555Z-7
    • https://www.starrett.com/
    • https://www.starrett.com/dms/flipbooks/Cat-33/index.html?page=354
  • Allen Wrenches
    • Bondhus: These are not made of SS, but of so called protanium steel. I have a chrome finish one (BriteGuard) and K14 gold finish one (goldguard).
    • https://intl.bondhus.com/pages/goldguard-ball-end
    • https://intl.bondhus.com/pages/briteguard-ball-end
  • Scissors
    • VWR - Stainless Steel
    • Unknown PN /  probably this?
    • https://us.vwr.com/store/product/4527635/vwr-dissecting-scissors-sharp-blunt-tip
  • Forceps
    • VWR - Stainless Steel
    • https://us.vwr.com/store/product/4531765/vwr-hemostatic-forceps
  • Wire cutters
    • Looks like they are orthodontic wire cutters. One has the marking "Orthomechanic Stainless Steel" but the company does not sell cutters anymore. The other has a marking "333" but the company is unknown. Similar products can be found on Amazon
  • Long nose pliers - straight stainless steel
    • https://www.aventools.com/
    • https://www.aventools.com/long-nose-pliers-stainless-steel-6-2
  • Bent nose pliers - stainless steel
    • unknown 
  • Tweezers
    • Excelta 
    • The short one is 20A-S-SE. The longer one is 24-SA-PI, maybe?
    • https://www.excelta.com/
    • https://www.excelta.com/straight-laboratory-instruments-forceps
    • https://www.excelta.com/style-24-24-6-sa
  • Mighty-Mouse spanner
  • 2x driver bits for the digital torque wrench

First Contact Kit

  • FC bottole / PEEK mesh

Bonding kit (excl EP30-2 bond)

  • reinforcement bars (4 types)
  • bonding liner powder
  • tools: spatula / bond applying rod

Power meters (excl Power meter controller)

  • Thorlabs Thermal
  • Thorlabs Photodiode
  • Thorlabs Integrating Sphere

Electronics

  • preamp + power cable
  • PD testing kit (PD connector / DB9 break out / grabber-BNC)
  • Nitrile gloves

Cable bracket replacement kit

  • PEEK cable bracket (Helicoiled)
  • Cable pegs (x4 salvaged / spare)
  • fastners
  • kapton sheet
  • cable ties

Optics / Optomechanics

  • Optical fiber / spare fiber
  • OMC transport feet
  • OMC backscatter inspection prisms

Misc tools

  • digital torque wrench

=== Action done on Aug 30 ===

Fiber MM setup / Fiber coupler mount
Glass Beamdumps (for optical testing)
Flipper mirror
Thorlabs fiber coupler tool
General bent nose plier for fiber
Thorlabs collimator tiny allen
Spare High QE PDs

Spare OMC bags / Zip bags

Balance Mass 10g Qty 8 (Different Type D11*** 1.25" dia), 20g Qty 10 / Mass damper D1700301 -04 / Mass damper screws SHCS 1/4-20 x 1.25 Qty 25 / 1" screws and 1 1/8" screws

Shipping request: https://services1.ligo-la.caltech.edu/FRS/show_bug.cgi?id=25002


=== Low supply! ===

  • Masks
  • 7.0 gloves supply low
  • 7.5 glove completely gone
  • Wet vectra cloth
  • Dry vectra cloth
Attachment 1: PXL_20220831_025623318.jpg
PXL_20220831_025623318.jpg
Attachment 2: PXL_20220831_024518032.jpg
PXL_20220831_024518032.jpg
Attachment 3: PXL_20220831_030234581.jpg
PXL_20220831_030234581.jpg
  449   Tue Sep 20 08:54:33 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralPD cage arrangement

Upon the LLO work, the current PD arrangement in the cages are:
CAGE B
B1 OMC1 PDT (A1-23)
B2 OMC1 PDR (A1-25)
B3 original (C1-03)
B4 OMC2 PDT (B1-22)

CAGE C
C1 OMC2 PDR (B1-23)
C2 original (C1-08)
C3 original (C1-09)
C4 original (C1-10)

  450   Mon Sep 26 14:27:49 2022 KojiGeneralGeneralLLO OMC ICS work

OMC #001

OMC #002

  346   Thu Apr 18 20:47:54 2019 JoeOptics OMC initial alignment and locking

[Joe, Phillip, Koji, Stephen]

*draft post, please add anymore info if I missed something*

  • made initial alignment of the cavity. To do this we used the periscope mirrors to aim the incoming beam at the centre of the first mirror and second (1st curved mirror) mirror. Using the micrometers (initial positions was 0.20mm), we moved the first curved mirror so that it hit the third mirror. We then used a combination of the periscope and first curved mirror movements to start seeing 2 or 3 round trips. micrometer was set to roughly 0.11mm. We then only used  periscope mirrors to align the beam into the cavity.
  • We set up a wincam at the transmission of the cavity. This was a useful was of seeing what mode was being transmitted through the cavity. We walked the beam with the periscope mirrors until we saw flashes of the TM00 mode.
  • Once the cavity was transmitting TM00 modes, we started to lock it. Once it was locked we looked at the the spot positions of beam on the mirrors. Phillip looked with an IR viewer and could see that the spots were too high on both the curved mirrors
  • We set up a CCD to capture an image of this. Two post holders have been left in place for easy movement of the CCD.

General notes about working with this set up. The lens on the CCD can come off quite easily, as you just change how much its screwed on to change the focus. Care should be taken that you don't know the template with this as well, as the camera is quite close to the template (and near the edge of the bench!). Also be mindful of the PZT wires, as they can pull the mirrors out of position.

Attachment 1 shows the position of the spots on the mirrors A14 and PZT11. The spots are about 3mm ish from the centre of the curved mirror in the vertical and horizontal direction. 

Attachment 2 sketch of mirror positions.

Attachment 3 shows the postion of the spot on PZT13. The spot is less near the edge than on PZT11, but its still 2mm ish from the centre of the curved mirror in both directions.

To move the beam horizontally we can use the alignment matrix in appendix C of T1500060. However since we don't have control over the pitch of the mirrors, moving the spots down could require us to inspect the glass breadboard/prisms for dust. We suspect that PZT could be the culprit, as we could not see newtonian rings between its base and the glass breadboard. One way to test this idea is just to clean the bottom of the PZT with acetone, and see if that improves the spot position. If we don't have to do any work to realign it, then this was not the issue.

Koji pointed out that the spot in attachment 1 is very near the edge of the optic, so shifting the beam horizontally could also fix the vertical issue. 

Attachment 1: IMG_7676.JPG
IMG_7676.JPG
Attachment 2: IMG_7666.JPG
IMG_7666.JPG
Attachment 3: IMG_7670.JPG
IMG_7670.JPG
Attachment 4: IMG_7883.JPG
IMG_7883.JPG
Attachment 5: IMG_7882.JPG
IMG_7882.JPG
  348   Fri Apr 19 09:35:28 2019 JoeGeneral Adjusting cavity axis, re-alignment of OMC and locking

[koji,philip, joe, liyuan, steven]

*still need to add photos to post*

PZT 11 was removed and inspected for so dust/dirt on the bottom of the prism. We saw a spot. We tried to remove this with acetone, but it stayed there. (Attachment 2, see the little white spec near the edge of the bottom surface of the prism)

current micrometer positions:

  • CM1: one closest to centre 11, close to edge 35 marking
  • CM2: both at 20 marking

Swapped PZT for PZT 22, cleaned the bottom and put it into position of CM1. We saw a low number of newton rings, so this is good.

We got a rough initial alignment by walking the beam with the periscope and PZT 22  mirrors. Once we saw a faint amount of transmission, we set up the wincam at the output. The reflected light from the cavity could also be seen to be flashing as the laser frequency was being modulated. 

Once it was roughly aligned, using the persicope we walked the beam until we got good 00 flashes. We checked the positions of the spots on the mirror with the beam card. This looked a lot better in the verticle direction (very near the centre) on both curved mirrors. We locked the cavity and contiued to align it better. This was done with the periscope until the DC error signal was about 0.6V. We switched to the fibre coupler after this. 

Once we were satisfied that he cavity was near where it would be really well aligned, we took some images of the spot positions. Using these we can work out which way to move the curved mirrors. Koji worked this out and drew some diagrams, we should attach them to this post. [Diagram: See Attachment 1 of ELOG OMC 350]

We made the corrections to the cavity mirrors

  • CM1: one closest to centre 11, close to edge 35+16 marking
  • CM2: I can't remember exactly, Koji created a diagram which would help explain this step [Diagram: See Attachment 2 of ELOG OMC 350]

The scatter from CM1 looked very small, it was hard to see with a viewer or CCD. We had to turn up the laser power by a factor of 3 to begin to see it, indicating that this is a good mirror.

Once this was done, the spot positions looked uch nearer the centre of each mirror. They look pitched 1mm too high, which might be because of the bottom surfaces of the prisms having a piece of dust on them? For now though it was good enough to try take the detuned locking FSR measurement and RFAM measurement. 

To see the higher order mode spacing, we misaligned them incoming beam in pitch and yaw so that the TM10 and TM01 modes were excited. The cavity transmission beam was aligned onto the photodiode such that we could make a transfer function measurement (i.e. shift the beam along the photodiode so that only half of the beam was on it, this maximises the amount of photocurrent).

attachment 1 shows the fitting of the detuned locking method for measuring FSR and cavity length/

I saved this data on my laptop. When I next edit this post (hopefully I will before monday, although I might be too tired from being a tourist in california...) I want to upload plots of the higher order mode spacing.

 

 

Attachment 1: FSR_Scan_Fitfsrdata.pdf
FSR_Scan_Fitfsrdata.pdf
Attachment 2: IMG_7679_cropped.jpg
IMG_7679_cropped.jpg
  351   Mon Apr 22 09:54:21 2019 JoeGeneral Shortening cavity (A5,A14,PZT11,PZT22) to get closer to design FSR

[Koji,Joe,Philip,stephen]

in units 20um per div on the micrometer [n.b. we reailised that its 10um per div on the micrometer]

CM1 inner screw pos: 11.5

cm1 outer screw pos: 33.5

cm2 inner screw pos: 11

cm2 outer screw pos: 13

the cavity is currently 3mm too long, move each mirror closer by 0.75mm

CM1 inner screw pos: 11.5+37.5 = 49

cm1 outer screw pos: 33.5+37.5= 71

cm2 inner screw pos: 11+37.5 = 48.5

cm2 outer screw pos: 13+37.5 = 50.5

The screws on the micrometers were adjusted to these values.

cleaned cm1 (PZT 11). There was a mark near the edge which we were not able to remove with acetone. On the breadboard there were 3 spots which we could not remove with acetone. Once we wiped the mirror and breadboard we put the mirror back. 

FM2 (A5). The prism looked quite bad when inspected under the green torch, with lots of lines going breadthways. We thought about replacing this with A1, however this has had the most exposure to the environment according to koji. This has a bit of negative pitch, so would bring down the beam slightly. We decided to continue to use A5 as it had worked fairly well before. The breadboard was cleaned, we could see a few spots on it, they were cleaned using acetone.

FM1 (A14). Near the edge of the bottom surface of the prism we could see some shiny marks, which may have been first contact. We attempted to scrape them off we tweezers. The breadboard looked like it had a few marks on it. These were hard to remove with the acetone, it kept leaving residue marks. We used isopropanol to clean this now, which worked much better. The sharp edges of the breadboard can cause the lens tissue to tear a bit, so it took a few rounds of cleaning before it looked good to put a prism on. The mirror was put back onto the breadboard. 

The cavity was aligned, then we realised that 1 turn is 500um, so its still too long (1.75mm long). The FSR was 264.433Mhz, which is 

CM2 still showed quite a bit more scattering than CM1, so we want to move this beam.

CM1:

  • inner = 0.405mm
  • outer = 0.67mm

CM2

  • inner = 0.507mm
  • outer = 0.42mm

want to increase by 1.7/4 = 0.425, so

CM1:

  • inner = 0.405+ 0.425 mm = 0.83 mm
  • outer = 0.67+ 0.425mm = 1.095 mm

CM2

  • inner = 0.507 + 0.425mm = 0.932 mm
  • outer = 0.42 + 0.425mm = 0.845 mm

we tried to align the cavity, however the periscope screws ran out of range, so we changed the mircometers on CM2. We tried this for quite some time, but had problems with the beam reflected from the cavity clipping the steering mirror on the breadboard (to close to the outer edge of the mirror). This was fixed by changing the angle of the two curved mirrors. (We should include a diagram to explain this).

The cavity was locke, the FSR was measured using the detuned locking method, and we found that the FSR = 264.805 MHz, which corresponds to a cavity length of 1.1321m

we took some photos, the spot is quite far to the edge of the mirrors (3 to 4mm), but its near the centre vertically. photos are 

123-7699 = CM2

123-7697 = CM1

 

 

Attachment 1: CM1_IMG_7699.jpg
CM1_IMG_7699.jpg
Attachment 2: CM2_IMG_7697.jpg
CM2_IMG_7697.jpg
  353   Tue Apr 23 10:21:12 2019 JoeOpticsConfigurationMoving the spots to the centre of the curved mirrors

[Koji,Philip, Liyuan, Joe]

CM1:

We moved the curved mirrors to these positions:

inner = 0.807mm

outer = 0.983 mm

CM2:

inner = 0.92 mm

outer = 0.85 mm

To do this so that realignment was easier, we moved the screws in steps of 5um. We alternated which mirror we adjusted so that we could monitor with a wincam how well aligned the beam into the cavity was. We only moved the cavity mirrors a small amount so we could still see higher order mode flashes transmitted through the cavity (e.g.TM03 modes). We would then improve the input alignment, and then move the cavity mirrors some more. Once the mirrors were adjusted according to http://nodus.ligo.caltech.edu:8080/OMC_Lab/190422_195450/misalignment4.pdf the spot positions looked near the middle of the curved mirrors (using a beam card). We began beam walking but we ran  out of range of the bottom periscope screws in the yaw dof. We tried using the third screw to move the mirrror in both yaw and pitch, hopefully this will let move the mirror such that we can use the just the yaw screw. This screw also ran out of range, so we decided that the cavity needed a small adjustment.

The curved mirrors were moved slightly (>5um) and then we tried to get alignment. By using the fibre coupler translation stage, we move the beam side ways slightly, and then tried to get the periscope mirrors back to a position where the screws could move the mirrors. Once we had an ok alignment, we checked the beam. It looked like it was pretty close to the centre of the curved mirrors, which is where we wanted it to be.

We then tried locking the cavity, although the error signal was quite small. The adjusted the input offset and gain of the servo (there is apparently some problem to do with the input and output offsets). Once the cavity was locked we could make the final adjustments to aligning. We still ran out of range on the periscope. We decided to move the breadboard with the fibre coupler and mode matching lenses on it. Because we knew that the cavity was aligned such that the beam hits the centres of the curved mirrors, we could regain flashes quite quickly. We saw the error signal go down, but eventually this decrease was just to do with the beam clipping on the periscope mirrors. We moved the spot back to where we ok aligned, and slid the periscope so we were not clipping the mirror. This worked very well, and then optimised the alignment.

We then tried to improve the mode matching. 

We took photos of the spot positions (quite near the center) and made the detuned locking measurement. The fitting of the data (attachment 1) wsa 1.1318m (what error should we put here?).

I think the order we did things in was:

  • turning anti clockwise on the fibre coupler and misalign the diode, we measured the modespacing.
  • returned the alignment for the photodiode, and realign fibre couple.
  • miss align the photodiode horizontally, and then used fibre coupler to maximise the peak higher order mode peak height. We then used the PD again to make the peak height bigger.
  •  
Attachment 1: FSR_detuned_locking.pdf
FSR_detuned_locking.pdf
Attachment 2: CM1_IMG_7702.JPG
CM1_IMG_7702.JPG
Attachment 3: CM2_IMG_7704.JPG
CM2_IMG_7704.JPG
  354   Wed Apr 24 13:58:51 2019 JoeOpticsCharacterizationOMC power budget and UV Epoxy Bonding of BS1

[koji,philip,joe,liyuan,stephen]

need to add spot positions.

Mirrors: PZT11,PZT22, A14, A5

Measurement postion Power P_normalise
P_in 15.66+-0.01mV 3.251+-0.001
V_ref,lock 64+-2mV 3.22+-0.001
V_ref,unlock 2.808+-0.001 V 3.253+-0.001
P_qpd 99.5+-0.5 uW 3.24+-0.002
P_cm1 79.0+-0.5 uW 3.22+-0.002
P_cm2 76.2+-0.03 uW 3.22+-0.01
P_trans 14.55+-0.05 mW 3.22+-0.01
Vref,dark -6.286 mV +-0.01mV  

Mode matching = 97.72%

15.66-> 15.30mW coupled.

~100uW for QPD

->15.2mW in cavity

Trans = 14.55mW -> 95.7% transmission

The flat mirrors were the ones with the most scattering, so we thought about how to improve it. We tried to move the first flat mirror by pushing it with our finger so that he beam would move along the optic. We tried this a couple of times, however the second time we moved it we lost our alignment and could not retrieve it. We looked at the mirror and we could see quite a lot of newtonian rings. We could see a small fibre on the glass bread board. We cleaned the optics base and the gbb, and we could get the alignment back. The beam was aligned to the cavity, the spots no longer hit the centre of the CM2. 

We measured the power budget again.

Measurement position Power P_normalise
V_ref,lock 47mV 3.24V
P_trans 14.45+-0.005mW 3.24 +-0.003 V
V_ref,unlock 2.68+-0.001 V 3.25+-.003
     

mode matching = 1-47/2680 = 0.9824, 98.2% mode matching

same p_normalise so

15.66-> 15.34mW coupled.

~15.24mW in cavity

transmission = 14.45, so 94.8% transmission.

Koji noticed that FM1 wasn't touching the template correctly, so he re-aligned the cavity.

Afternoon session - UV Bonding (E1300201-v1 procedure 6.4.4 "Gluing" using procedure in section 7.2 "UV Gluing")

Wiped down UV PPE, UV Illuminator, and UV Power Meter

Applied Optocast 3553-LV Epoxy to sample fused silica optics, to test quantity of glue needed and to become familiar with the process and tools. Philip and Joe each created a successful bond. Joe's had 3 visible spots in the bulk of the bond. Acetone was used to scrub some residue of epoxy from the surface near the OD, which was likely cured. Short duration exposure (seconds) to acetone at the perimeter of the bond did not yield any weakening of bond.

While test pieces were bonded, Koji was making some adjustments to the cavity alignment in preparation for gluing of the steering mirror BS1.

Koji noticed that the spring clamp was causing pitch in the BS1 mirror, so he recommended that we utilize the "restrain by allen key" technique to load the mirror during curing.

Once aligned, we tried taking the BS1 mirror out of the template and then putting it back. We did this twice and both times the cavity needed realigning (with the curved mirrors as well as the input steering periscope). Why is this? Since the mirror was touching the template it should not have become misaligned right? Maybe the template moves slightly? I think before glueing in the cavity mirrors we should find out why probably? Koji took a look and claimed that a few optics may have been unconstrained. 

Planning between Koji and Joe led to placement of 5 drops of epoxy on the BS1 surface, to match the bonding area. At this point we noticed that the template was not secured very well, by poking down on it we could see it move. This might explain why we are becoming misaligned very easily. Once the prism was back on the board, Koji used allen keys to move around the prism. This was done until we could align it again (i.t looked too pitched). The beam was aligned back into the cavity, and the UV light was used to cure the bond. The reflected DC when locked was

  • pre-cured = 47mV
  • cured = 55 mV

so it looks ok still.

 

 

 

  355   Thu Apr 25 15:05:19 2019 JoeOpticsCharacterizationLooking at PZT HOM spacing dependance and thinking about workflow

[koji, joe]

The template or glass breadboard was wobbling, and we noticed that the caivty alignment became worse/better when it was pressed down. We saw that it was the glass breadboard, so it was fixed into the transport fixture more securely. Now its alignement didn't change when it was pressed down. We took a pzt mirror out and replaced it, the alignment din't change much so that was good. We set up posts to hold the pzt wires.

We noticed that the bottom of the mirrors were dirty, so we cleaned them, and once we were happy with the newton rings, we aligned the cavity

Took a photo of CM2, the spot is maybe 1 beam diameter vertically and horizontally from the centre, and quite a bright spot could be seen. The same problem with CM1. We thought it would be good to see a measurement of higher order mode spacing dependence on PZT DC voltage rather than doing the full characterisation since the alignment seems to change quite a lot when ever we do anything, and this cavity arrangement probably isn't very good anyway (can see scattering on both curved mirrors with the IR camera). 

did measurements of FSR, = 2.64835MHz

did HOM spacing for 0,75,150V on CM1 in pitch and yaw.

we want to come up with a work flow for how to do these measurements, and make automate parts of the analysis?

 

  144   Fri Jun 14 06:35:21 2013 JeffGeneralGeneral[LLO] L1 OMC status

https://alog.ligo-la.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=7410

Weights:

Suspension cage and transportation box: 250.8lb
Suspension cage and transportation box: 150.2lb ==> 100.6lb ==> 45,630 g

Metal Breadboard: 7261 g

Glass Breadboard and transportation fixture: 16382 g
Transportation fixture only: 9432 g ==> 6950 g
Added mass (up to now): 300 g ==> 7250 g

Preamp arrangement

preamp_arrangement.png 

  362   Thu May 16 12:41:28 2019 ChubGeneralGeneralfire pillow found on optics table

That is an expanding fire pillow, also known as firebrick.  It is used to create a fire block where holes in fire-rated walls are made and prevents lab fires from spreading rapidly to adjacent labs.  I had to pull cable from B254 to our labs on either side during a rather narrow window of time.  Some of the cable holes are partially blocked, making it difficult to reach the cable to them. The cable is then just guided to the hole from a distance.  With no help, it's not possible to see this material getting shoved out of the hole.  I can assure you that I took great pains not to allow the CYMAC coax to fall into any equipment, or drag against any other cables.   

  309   Thu Sep 27 20:19:15 2018 AaronOpticsGeneralMontecarlo simulation of the phase difference between P and S pols for a modeled HR mirror

I started some analytic calculations of how OMC mirror motion would add to the noise in the BHD. I want to make some prettier plots, and am adding the interferometer so I can also compute the noise due to backscatter into the IFO. However, since I've pushed the notebook I wanted to post an update. Here's the location in the repo.

I used Koji's soft limit of 0.02 degrees additional phase accumulation per reflection for p polarization.

  310   Thu Nov 1 19:57:32 2018 AaronOpticsGeneralMontecarlo simulation of the phase difference between P and S pols for a modeled HR mirror

I'm still not satisfied/done with the solution to this, but this has gone too long without an update and anyway probably someone else will have a direction to take it that prevents me spinning my wheels on solved or basic questions.

The story will have to wait to be on the elog, but I've put it in the jupyter notebook. Basically:

  • I considered the polarization-separated OMC in several configurations. I have plots of DARM referred noise (measured free-running and controlled noise for the current OMC, thermal theoretical noise curve, scattered light) for the case of such an OMC with one lambda/2 waveplate oriented at 45 degrees. This is the base case.
  • I also considered such an OMC with a lambda/2 both before and after the OMC, where their respective polarization axes can be arbitrary (I look at parameter space near the previous case's values).
    • I optimize the BHD angle to balance the homodyne (minimize the E_LO^2 term in the homodyne readout).
    • I then optimize the rotations of the lambda/2 polarization axes to minimize the noise
    • For the optimum that is closest to the base case, I also plotted DARM referred length noise.

 

It's clear to me that there is a way to optimize the OMC, but the normalization of my DARM referred noise is clearly wrong, because I'm finding that the input-referred noise is at least 4e-11 m/rt(Hz). This seems too large to believe. 

Indeed, I was finding the noise in the wrong way, in a pretty basic mistake. I’m glad I found it I guess. I’ll post some plots and update the git tomorrow. 

ELOG V3.1.3-