Randy, Ibrahim
Randy and I put the BBSS in the can today, as shown by pictures.
Following LLO's advice from their experiences in alog 79950, we were able to use the aluma lift to can the BBSS. What we did in order:
1. Strip locked-mass BBSS of all cables, check for looseness, bring alum-a-lift into position to lift BBSS from lifitng bars
2. Undo dog clamps to let lift take suspension load, ensure suspension is secured on the lift. Move BBSS out of test stand - as LLO said, very small clearance.
3. Prepare temporary platform for lift fork adjustment
4. Set BBSS on temporary platform - this part was successful but needed extra blocks to avoid interference with Y-bracks on the Lower Structure.
5. Adjust forks to be allow for canning without bottoming out, relift.
6. Put into wiped-down can and check for looseness. Rewipe, check for particulate and ensure secure fit
7. Close doors.
See pictures below.
EPO taggin'.
Ibrahim, Randy
Randy and I opened the can to:
See pictures below for each and another overall image.
We then buttoned the BBSS and tightened all screws. It is now ready for transport.
FAMIS 31124
FSS has been on and off over the past week and the PZT has been swept several times for JAC install work, but otherwise not much to report this week.
Mon Feb 09 10:10:47 2026 INFO: Fill completed in 10min 44secs
FAMIS Link: 39337
Only CPS channels which look higher at high frequencies (see attached) would be the following:
In the bash window we get this note:
"HAM high freq noise is elevated for these sensor(s)!!!: HAM1_CPSINF_V2 & V3 "
The GC UPS reported a brief switch to battery power this morning due to a minor glitch in power on all three phases. The MSR UPS did not report.
TITLE: 02/09 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
Wind: 6mph Gusts, 4mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.34 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
HAM7 not pumped down. HAM1 JAC work continues. LVEA is in the Bifurcated Laser SAFE state. And Seahawks are Super Bowl Champs!
Coordination Meeting Notes:
(Jordan V., Gerardo M.)
-Late entry
On Friday we removed and replaced the ion pump for HAM3. We replaced the copper gasket twice, the first gasket seal had a bad leak, it was hard to see the mating surfaces due to visibility issues (laser safety goggles and not enough light).
After installing a second gasket, we started pumping down the annulus system and pressure went down fast. Last pressure reading at the aux-cart was 4.63x10^-05 Torr.
BTW, we have other 4 (four) ion pumps to replace.
EPO taggin'.
(Jordan V., Gerardo M.)
After a couple of days of "assisted" pumping, the annulus system isolation valve was closed. After a day of solo pumping the ion pump was able to maintain the annulus pressure at nominal. Now the aux-cart, can turbo and hoses were removed, pressure looks good.
Sun Feb 08 10:11:56 2026 INFO: Fill completed in 11min 52secs
Sat Feb 07 10:09:46 2026 INFO: Fill completed in 9min 42secs
Summary of investigation into the vertically split beam from the EOM
First, we confirmed that the vertical beam splitting observed yesterday originates from the EOM itself. To check the possibility of multiple reflections from lenses, we inspected the back-reflection port of the JAC output mirror. Two reflected beams were observed, most likely originating from the planar and curved surfaces of the lens, and they were mainly separated in yaw. Since the space between the EOM and the lens was blocked during this test, these reflections were conclusively identified as lens reflections. No vertically split beams were observed from this source.
A knife-edge–like test was performed by slowly lowering a metal ruler from the top at both the EOM input and output. At the EOM input, the entire beam disappeared simultaneously, whereas at the output the beam disappeared gradually from the top. This behavior confirmed that the vertical splitting is generated inside the EOM.
To accurately determine the beam positions at the EOM input and output, beam positions were measured from photographs. Taking refraction and geometry into account, it was found that the beam is slightly displaced in the horizontal direction. Details of this analysis will be documented in Keita’s alog.
Based on this result, the EOM was rotated in yaw. Dog clamps were placed at the ±y projection points of the EOM input and output, in contact with the base plate. One 0.5-mm shim was inserted between the base plate and each dog clamp to rotate the EOM counterclockwise. However, the beam pattern did not change. Additional shims were tested, but no significant change was observed. The EOM was fixed with one 0.5-mm shim at each position.
Next, pitch adjustments were explored. The original shim configuration (two shims on the +y side and one on the −y side) was changed by moving shims to the +x side (one location at center) and the −x side (two locations, upper and lower). Each location initially had two shims, and by adding or removing shims, it was observed that the vertical positions of the split beams changed. When the +x (downstream) side was raised, the vertically split beams appeared in the upper part of the beam profile (approximately 5–7 beams; Keita will upload photos). Conversely, when shims were added to raise the −x side, the split beams moved toward the lower part of the beam. With the downstream side lowered by approximately 0.25 mm, about two beams were observed in the upper part and one in the lower part.
1W input power shows 6 or more beams, but 2-3 beams can be observed even with 100mW.
With the last configuration, we proceeded the IMC scan measurement after alignment. The 2nd order mode peak was the same level as we observed when we sim up the EOM first time.
In summary, the EOM shows highly questionable and nontrivial behavior. Possible causes include diffraction due to crystal defects or multiple reflections at the AR-coated surfaces. However, identifying the exact mechanism is challenging at this stage.
Horizontal beam position offset on the EOM input and output aperture on the side plates.
We realized that the nominal beam position on the EOM input and output aperture is NOT centered on the crystal cross section projected onto the side plate face, the beam is horizontally offset in +Y direction.
Look at the first cartoon (cartoon.jpg) and references therein. The beam spot offsets are 0.91mm on the input side plate and 0.54mm on the output side plate, respectively, assuming that the beam deflection angle per surface of EOM is 2.35 degrees as implied in D2500130.
0.91mm is not a small offset, it's almost 1/4 of the crystal thickness (it's 4x4x40mm).
This means that the beam should be (see nominal_sideplate.png, note that the drawing scale of the input aperture in this is twice that of the output aperture):
~3.9mm from the left (+Y) edge of the visual alignment aid notch on the input side plate,
~3.2mm from the right (again +Y) edge of the aperture hole on the output side plate.
Measurements, adjustments and measurements made the beam closer to the nominal location.
Based on the above knowledge, we took pictures of the beam position on the input/output aperture, paying attention to the errors that could arise from the parallax (which is unavoidable), i.e. the sensor card should be as close to the face of the side plate as possible and the beam spot on the sensor card should be as close to the sentor of the camera sensor as possible. This was a tougher job than you think.
Anyway, in the first round of measurements, we convinced ourselves that the beam was:
off in -Y direction by 0.7mm relative to the nominal beam position on the input plate of the EOM,
off in +Y direction by 0.5mm on the output,
give or take 0.2mm or so (the error is based on two pictures for the input beam position with random variation in parallax coming from camera position and the distance between the side plate surface and the viewer card).
We rotated the entire EOM base by using two dog clamps against the EOM base and inserting appropriate shims (EOM_rotation.png). We didn't use the YAW adjustment feature for the EOM pivot plate because there's no way to rotate it in a controlled manner.
After the first adjustment we thought that the beam coming out of the EOM looked better (which might have been false). On the second adjustment the beam looked the same or slightly worse (which might have been false) and we reverted back to the same position as the first adjustment.
Multiple beams mostly in PIT coming out of EOM (pictures and history)
1W into HAM1, otherwise it's hard to photograph these clearly.
The first picture is right after the YAW adjustment was made but before adjusting PIT. The card is held just ABOVE the main beam, you can see four blobs that look like some kind of ghost beams. (If you try to picture the main beam, it's so bright these ghosts become hard to capture.)
The second picture is after the first PIT adjustment. You can only see maybe two blobs, but later we found that the rest went below the main beam (sorry no "below" picture).
So, to recap the history of the beam quality,
Other things.
Just to make sure, we turned down the 9MHz and 45MHz RF power to 3dBm and disconnected the 118MHz and 24MHz cables and nothing changed.
We know that the crystal wedge is supposed to be horizontal and we know that the wedge orientation is correct. When we first installed the EOM in chamber, the EOM transmission was deflected horizontally in +Y direction.
Curoius thing about the EOM dimensions
Crystal length L=40mm, thickness T=4mm=L/10, wedge angle w=2.85 deg, and tan(2w) = 0.09981 ~ 1/10.
Though this is probably not related to the ghost beams in PIT direction, when the beam is perfectly aligned with the EOM (i.e. the light traveling the center of the crystal), the internal AR reflection of at the output face of the crystal hits the side of the crystal and the specular reflection will hit the input surface of the crystal and almost exactly comes back on top of the main beam with only 0.0272mm offset. See the 1st cartoon.
Note that the side surfaces are not polished (though the AOI is 84.3 deg so most of the power is reflected back into the crystal due to total internal reflection).
If you displace the beam in horizontal direction, the AR path is displaced in the opposite direction by about the same amount (i.e. if the main beam moves by 0.5mm toward the short face of the crystal, the AR-side-AR beam moves by about 0.5mm toward the long face). If you continue tracing the AR-side-AR beam, it turns out that the AR-side-AR-AR-side-AR beam will come back exactly on the main beam. See the 2nd cartoon (which is actually to scale, the main beam is off by 0.5mm and the 1st ghost is off by 0.5272 in the opposite direction, and the 2nd ghost is on top of the main beam).
Interesting design choice.
TITLE: 02/06 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
Super Bowl Weekend SHIFT SUMMARY:
JAC team continued with JAC alignment work in HAM1. HAM3 AIP was swapped & started pumping over the weekend.
(Go Seahawks!)
LOG:
FAMIS 28229
pH of PSL chiller water was measured to be between 10.0 and 10.5 according to the color of the test strip.
From the previous alog post, Sheila measured a power drop across BL2 lens.
Here I modeled the loss of the 700um beam waist across the 2.5mm BL2 lens aperture.
The expression for the transmitted power obtained by modifying the Gaussian beam equation to include a displacement d2 = dx2 + dy2 is shown here.
And here's the contour plot for the loss (1-T) across the lens aperture for a beam transversing across various spots on the lens.
Me and Sheila are checking on the geometry of the setup.
The BM3 mirror mount IXM100.2 has a 100 pitch screw adjustment ( correspond to 100 turn per inch translation), and the beam appeared to be clipped symmetrically for 1/8 rev. For the mirror mount of 1.87" width, this correspond to a mirror rotation of 1.3mrad.
The distance between BM3 and BL2 is 148mm, from the mirror rotation, the IR beam angular deflection is 2.6mrad, this implies an aperture size of 0.4mm. Something is not right, and it's a mystery that requires more investigation.
WP13007
The rawminute trend copy to permanent archive completed 04feb2026. Today I reconfigured NDS1 to serve these data from their permanent archival location and started the deletion of the files from TW1.
NDS1 was restarted at 12:51 for the new configuration.
Deletion of last 6 months of raw minute trend files took 1hr56min. Disk usage reduced from 93% to 2%.
[Sheila, Eric, Jim, Kar Meng, Daniel D.]
When we started working this morning, the particle counts were 20/10/10 per cubic foot
It looked like the old cable for the PZT that needs to be replaced was routed to back into the chamber to a cable bracket which was far from reach. Before we can remove it, we need to find the cable harness plan for HAM7.
In the mean time, we were able to re-route the TEC cable using photos from this alog.
### Broke for lunch ###
Over lunch, we determined the correct connector for the PZT/translation stage was on CB5 in HAM7. It's labeled cable #4 according to the wiring diagram. We also verified the correct operation of the TEC controller and the oven from CDS
After we returned, the particle counts were 0/0/0 per cubic foot and we uncovered the chamber to finish replacing the cables.
Unfortunately, cable #4 between CB5 (see image) and the OPO is terminated in a male molded connector, which is screwed into the connector bracket. This meant that we needed to remove the female cable (from the flange) from the rear of the connector and then remove the male connector (to OPO) from the cable bracket. Jim came in to help us reach the connector and he decided that it would be easier to remove the top and second-from-top connectors (3rd and 4th on CB5 in the wiring plan) from the bracket to make it easier to reach the ones for cable #4. Jim was able to remove the old cable and replace it with the new one in the bracket.
After Jim left, we were able to continue reinstalling the new cable. The longest DB-9 tentacle on the new cable is for the VOPO PZTs, the DB-15 is for the stage control, and the short DB-9 is a spare which was coiled to the side. We were then able to connect the piezo and stage control connectors to the OPO and roughly re-route the cabling on the ISI table. Final routing and securing of these new cables/checking for mistakes is still required.
Cable removed was D1700438-V2-00-S2101231