Naoki, Vicky
In alog70212, Vicky stepped ZM5/6 P/Y by 100 count (-100 count for ZM6 P) to check the sensing matrix of SQZ ASC. We checked the response of AS A/B RF42 as shown in the attached ndscope. The measured sensing matrix is as follows.
| ZM5 P | ZM6 P | ZM5 Y | ZM6 Y | |
| AS A RF42 P | 0.61 | |||
| AS B RF42 P | -0.15 | 0.2 | ||
| AS A RF42 Y | 0.16 | 0.61 | ||
| AS B RF42 Y | 0.1 | 0.5 |
It seems the AS B RF42 has some P/Y cross coupling (or ZM5 driving has P/Y cross coupling?), but apart from that, the input matrix of SQZ ASC should be proportional to the inverse matrix of the measured sensing matrix, which can be calculated as follows.
| AS A RF42 P | AS B RF42 P | |
| ZM5 P | -6.7 | |
| ZM6 P | 1.6 |
| AS A RF42 Y | AS B RF42 Y | |
| ZM5 Y | 2 | |
| ZM6 Y | 1.6 | -0.52 |
The current input matrix for SQZ ASC is shown in the second attached figure. The POS and ANG correspond to the ZM5 and ZM6, respectively. Compared with the calculated matrix above, the current input matrix seems not correct. The correct input matrix should be proportional to the calculated matrix above and I propose a new input matrix as follows, which is larger than the calculated matrix by a factor of -10. This factor of -10 is chosen to have the same order of input matrix as the current one and it can be adjusted depending on the desired UGF of SQZ ASC. We will try this new input matrix soon.
| AS A RF42 P | AS B RF42 P | |
| ZM5 P | 67 | |
| ZM6 P | -16 |
| AS A RF42 Y | AS B RF42 Y | |
| ZM5 Y | -20 | |
| ZM6 Y | -16 | 5.2 |
I engaged the new input matrix around 1370378757 (2023/06/09 20:45:39 UTC). Everything seems working, but we need to compare the squeezing performance before/after this change carefully.