Evan, Paul

Yesterday we repeated the beam size measurements on ISCT1, with the quieter ITMX.

First we measured the PRM direct reflected beam, in reflection of the window after the ISCT1 periscope. We misaligned ITMX and ITMY for this measurement, and also misaligned the ALS beam from X-ARM with the PZTs. Slight disclaimer with this beam: since it's in reflection from a non-AR coated window, there are two beams of roughly equal power, separated by only a little over 1cm. I would therefore be a little less confident in the x-radius data for this beam. If possible, at some time it would be good to use a pick-off mirror that avoids this problem for the PRM direct reflection beam.

Then we moved the nanoscan to a position in transmission of the window and measured ITMX and ITMY direct reflected beams. For those two measurents we misaligned PRM, ETMX, and the ITM that we weren't measuring the beam from. During this time, 4W was being applied to the IMTY ring heater.

The beam radii we measured were:

The ITM beams we measured yesterday were slightly smaller than we observed last time. For ITMX at least, the motion of the beam on the nanoscan was significantly less than last time, so these results should be more reliable. Rich switched on some seismic isolation before we measured the ITMY beam, which appeared to result in a DC misalignment of ITMY. We adjusted the alignment offsets to account for this and left it aligned in that manner. The alignment offsets that were in place before we began were:

ITMX was at P=92.8 Y=-65.9

ITMY was at P=19.2 Y=-140.7

ETMX was at P=250.7 Y=87.1

PRM was at  P=-685 Y=-447

Attached are the beam motion / radius ASDs from the logged data from the nanoscan. Comparing with the ASDs attached to aLOG 9773, we can see that the ITMX beam motion was significantly less this time.