J. Kissel

Now that we're approaching ER10, and the noise is getting back to O1 levels, we need to start tracking the time dependence of the SRCL detuning in the DARM response. As such, with only intuition to guide, I've added a new calibration line at 7.83 Hz, driven by PCALY at a requested amplitude of 20000 [ct] (corresponds to a DAC [ct/rtHz] of 28909, and 8.8e-13 [m/rtHz] of DARM displacement). For a 10 [sec] FFT, with the current sensitivity, this has about an SNR of 10. We can explore driving the line harder, but let's see what we get out of this -- we're already close to the limit of the PCAL AOM, and that's what I used to tune the excitation amplitude. Also note that, although we often use a 10 [sec] FFT as our SNR metric, in practice, we often use 60 or 120 [sec] FFTs (i.e. the time scale on which we expect optical plant parameters to vary), so we'll win there.

I've checked to make sure that this new line
- Does not saturate the PCALY DAC
- Does not saturate the PCALY OFS
- Does not saturate the DARM actuator when trying to control this line (ETMY SUS) 
- Does not generate any substantial harmonics or other non-linear noise in DARM

And I've also accepted the settings for this new line in the safe and OBSERVE snaps for PCALY.

Let's get this line into SLM tool and start analyzing to see if the SRC detuning moves!

P.S. We expect fisher-matrix back-up that this is roughly the "optimal" location for the SRCL line, given that we suspect the optical spring frequency to be around 9.8 [Hz]. Of course, we cannot put the line right on 9.8 [Hz], since that's exactly the frequency of the QUAD's highest vertical mode (a.k.a. "bounce" mode). I've compared 7.93 [Hz] against all of the "do not put a line here" criteria used for the original calibration lines (see LLO aLOG 15870), and this frequency does indeed satisfy those criteria especially since the line is below the astrophysical analysis band.