COMM handoff today

Alexa, Daniel, Sheila

Today we were able to lock COMM stably.  (Thanks to some extra time from the red team and SEI people).   By COMM I mean that we can lock the PSL to the green arm transmitted power, using the mode cleaner as an actuator.  I don't want to call it the CARM handoff as we called it durring HIFOY, to make a distinction between this ALS handoff and when we do the handoff of the common arm degree of freedom to corner IR signals from the ALS signals.  

We have 2 scripts that do the handoff in the new way, userapps/als/h1/scripts COMM_handoff and COMM_down_2

COMM_down_2 brings COMM down in a nice way that does not unlock the mode cleaner.  We will work on getting this into guardian at some point.  We will try simplifying the COMM handoff script in the future.

We are now using a crossover at 15 Hz, 23 degrees of phase margin (plot attached).  This allows us to engage the two notches in the MC2ISCINF (at 29 and 40 Hz) that prevent us from ringing up suspension modes.  We struggled to get the crossover this low, because the slow path losses phase at low frequencies much faster than we understand.  We added into LSC CARM a z5p20 to get some phase back, and also lowered our compensation filter (6) zero to 6Hz.  We are also no longer using the z40:p150 which is used by the mode cleaner locking in MC2M3. 

The ugf is at 10s of kHz, Alexa has plots she will post.  The open loop gain shows a peak at around 27kHZ.  When we looked into why this was, we saw that the PLL has almost no phase margin. 

Anyway, the good news is we can reliably do the handoff, and it seems to stay locked at least as long as we left it alone, which wasn't more than 10 minutes or so. 

ITMY ISI X-Tilt Decoupling (CPS_Align)

See attached for test progress and final result (Red Traces).  The values for these corrections are 0.0015 & 0.00075 for XtoRX & XtoRY respectively.

The values for ITMY Y-Tilt are -0.0007 & 0.0005 for YtoRX & YtoRY.  The second plot is for this drive axis.  The plot isn't as busy or interesting but the results are slightly better in the cross term.

I'll attach the MEDM to just cause I can.

I'll try to get measurements to show the results that Rich & I have gotten on the other ISIs over the this frenzied week.

MC offsets snapshots with new calibration

for future reference, attached are the new offsets of MC corresponding to the new calibration calculated by Paul, cf

https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=9870

ETMX L2 UL still noisy

[Fil Arnaud]

The upper left osem of the ETMX PUM remains noisy : its noise floor is higher than LR by a factor of ~5 @10hz, see red curve vs green of 1st pdf.
To make sure it didn't come from some electronics noise, Fil unplugged the cable between the vacuum flange and the PUM. The noise floor went down by a factor of 15 @10hz, meaning it's definitely not coming from any of the electronics. cf blue of 2nd pdf before unplugging vs green after. The flag might be not centered as well as the other osems

Ops Shift Summary

8:50-9:31 Mirror Mounts work in H2 LAE (LVEA)– R. Savage
8:57-12:00 Going to End X to do documentation work – Luis
9:20      PSL Check List: All the parameters were OK except the FSS Threshold on transmitted photo-detector PD = 0.49V (should be 0.9V)
9:25-9:50 Repair person on site to fix the tractor
9:30-     Going to END Y to do TMS work – Corey/Keita
9:49-12:00 Work on SUS electronics (PUM Chassis) at END X – Filiberto
10:07-10:33 Searching for parts in LVEA – Thomas 

PRMI guardian beta version released

I have created a new guardian which watches the PRMI locking. Once green team finishes their locking activity, we will test this out with the real interferometer.

It is currently in

/opt/rtcds/userapps/release/lsc/common/guardian/LSC_PRMIsb.py

This guardian script looks into an up script which is in

/opt/rtcds/userapps/release/lsc/h1/scripts/autolock/prmi/sideband/prmi_sb_up.py

If you want to refresh the PRMI locking settings, you can always command this up state and it sets up the LSC settings and PRM/PR2/BS settings upon a request.

 

ITMX isi isolation

this is a dtt session from last night showing the performance of the ITMX ISI

  The ISI is running a level 3 controller with TCrappy blend filters (40mHz on stage 1 translation)

  Sensor correction and feed forward are NOT running yet

 

  The units are kind of in nm/sec/rthz except that I haven't inverted the L4C and GS13 response (T240s are flat down to 10mhz)

  Left column is X, Y and Z amplitude spectra, Right column is rX, rY and rZ

  Center column is transfer function from the ground

 

  The GS13 plot is in nm/rtHZ and the GS13 noise plot is for a single instrument, so there are factors of 2-ish floating around

 

  and the GS13 is an in loop measurment

EX - PUM Monitor Readbacks Channels

Arnaud reported PUM monitor readback channels not changing states. Looked at binary commands coming into chassis and could see inputs changing states. The relays could also be heard changing states. Outputs did not change. 
Had similiar issue at corner station https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=3153 

Replaced R111 from 10K to 100K on all channels. All monitors are responding as expected. 
D1100303 Serial Number S1000343.

Filiberto Clara

RM1/RM2 steering off of LSC/ASC REFL PDs

(Keita, Sheila, Evan)

On Bram Slagmolen's suggestion, we wanted to see if the RM1 and RM2 tip-tilts have sufficient range to steer the PRM refl beam off of LSC-REFL_A, ASC-REFL_A, and ASC-REFL_B.

Initial configuration (before touching any sliders):
PRM alignment offsets: -685 cts pitch, -447 cts yaw.
RM1 alignment offsets: 0 cts pitch, 0 cts yaw.
RM2 alignment offsets: 0 cts pitch, 0 cts yaw.
Power on LSC-REFL_A_LF_OUTMON: 15200 cts.
Power on ASC-REFL_A_DC_SUM_OUTMON: 34400 cts.
Power on ASC-REFL_B_DC_SUM_OUTMON: 36500 cts.

By moving RM1 yaw to -1350 cts and RM2 yaw to -1350 cts, all three PD channels go dark (+/- a few cts). So it appears that it is possible to use these TTs to steer the PRM refl beam off these PDs by misaligning in yaw.

Phase 3A TFs for H1-SR2

Overnight we ran the Phase 3a TFs on H1-SR2. The plots are attached below. The results look positive. 

green beat note, alingment this morning

Alexa, Sheila, others

This morning we had a difficult time realinging, for reasons that aren't all clear.  (It seems like this should be easier than it normaly is.)

A few things that happened:

ITMX ISI was not isolating, did someone do this on purpose? Jim brought it back up for us.

The M0 Lock filter gains were reset to 1 again, so that the loop gains for the intial arm alingment were wrong again.  Arnaud figured out that guargian is doing this, and is working on a solution.  Beware, anyone who sets gains in SUS lock filters, they will get overwritten with the sus guardian as is.

After we got the arm cavity alingment back and stable, I had to realing the beat note on ISCT1.  I was able to realing it just by using an IR card and saw 27.4mV pp coming out of the PD, so this seems good enough for now.

Some numbers:

SHG shutter closed: -42dBm reported by PFD RF readback, about 1mV pp noise on the RF mon of the PFD.

Shutter open and beam aligned by eye: -34dBm reported by PFD RF readback, 27.4mV pp out of the PD, and about 2.5 mV pp on RF mon of the PFD. 

aLOG outage moved to 11:30am pacific today

Please save your log entries before 11:30am pacific.

The work is completed

Repeating beam size measurements on ISCT1

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:

	x-radius [um]	y-radius [um]
PRM direct	1934	2150
ITMX direct	2338	2424
ITMY direct	2123	2167

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.

Scheduled downtime Friday 7 Feb 2014 noon Pacific

The aLOG will be down for maintenance tomorrow at noon (pacific time).

Please post or save your log entries before the maintenance.

The downtime is being moved earlier in the day to 11:30am pacific.

The work is completed

IMC mirror alignment offset calibration using transmitted power drop

I finally got a script working to step the alignment offsets on the IMC mirrors and record the transmitted power drop with MC2trans and IM4trans QPDs. 

The idea behind this was to compare the quadratic function for power drop with misalignment with the theoretical function, giving us a means of accurately calibrating the alignment offsets.

The reason I'm interested in calibrating these offsets accurately is for beam jitter measurements using the coupling from jitter to RIN in transmission of a misaligned IMC [see e.g. LHO aLOG entry 8190]. The coupling factor is determined by the slope of the quadratic function, so we can't calibrate jitter measurements made in this way any better than we can calibrate the DC alignment offset.

The first attached plot shows the normalized transmitted power obtained for each individual mirror DOF, from both IM4trans QPD and MC2trans QPD, over "intended" alignment offset. Also included is a plot of the normalized transmitted power from a Finesse model of the IMC over "real" misalignment offset. From these plots we can see that in general the alignment offsets actually applied to the MC mirrors are larger than the intended alignment offsets. However, the measured data is not always symmetric (especially for IM4). This could be due to clipping at the QPDs. The centering on IM4trans is not as good as the centering on MC2trans, so I would be more confident in the numbers from MC2trans.

I fitted a quadratic function P=A(x-h)^2+k to each of the curves. The calibration is then done by scaling the alignment offsets applied to the actual suspensions by sqrt(Amodel/Adata). The second attached plot shows each DOF again, but this time with the x-axis scaled for the measured data to fit the model. I used the scaling factors calculated from MC2trans data since the centering on this QPD was better. For the most part I'd say the data matches the model well after this scaling.

These scaling factors are:

DOF	Scaling factor
MC1 Pitch	0.7043
MC1 Yaw	0.8223
MC2 Pitch	0.8572
MC2 Yaw	0.8326
MC3 Pitch	0.7823
MC3 Yaw	0.8588

I would propose to include these scaling factors in the calibration of the MC mirror offsets.

The script can be run again at any time to check for any possible changes in e.g. the OSEM coil driver gains over time. It might be beneficial to take more data points at some point too, but the script takes 15mins or so to run as it is (mainly due to the time given for optics to settle between changes of offset). Another improvement would be to step MC1 and MC3 pitch over a larger range, since the transmitted power is actually fairly insensitive to these DOFs. Both these things can be edited in the top few lines of the script.

In case anyone is interested in running this script in future, it is located at opt/rtcds/userapps/release/ioo/h1/scripts/imc/pfulda/IMC_align_calibrate.py

Be sure to run the mcWFSrelieve script located in opt/rtcds/userapps/release/ioo/h1/scripts/imc/ first though!

I attach the analysis scripts here too, including the measured data, Finesse model and results, and other functions used.

HAM6 CPS Noise Floor

I measured the noise floopr of the HAM-6 CPS. This is in the configuration that seemed best at LLO, a ground from the electronics rack and a local ground.

 

The gold colored line is twice our noise model which is what we were getting at LLO.  I have been using two different targets which are at +/-4Volts and since the noise goes as the square of the

distance we would expect the noise from the channels using the different targets to be  (1+0.4)^2 and (1 -0.4)^2  (there is a 1mm offest) which is more or less what we are seeing at high frequencies. 

At low frequencies (were we use then in the control) it is clearly steepper then the noise model

 

 there is also a noise spike at 0.5Hz in H2 and V2, I chased this a bit last night and found

 

  - It doesn't look like it is coming from the CPS electronics, I turned of the power to the CPS (unplugging the calbe in the electronics room) and it was still there

 - when I shorted out the inputs to the HAM SEI interface on channels #1 and 2 it popped up in channel H3 and V3 

 - as far as I can tell it has always been at exactly 0.5Hz

 

ETMy OL values

Betsy swapped all the BOSEMs and AOSEMs on ETMy and left them retracted for open light measurements. The resulting values with gains and offsets are:

prettyOSEMgains('H1','ETMY')

M0F1 30218 0.993 -15109
M0F2 29922 1.003 -14961
M0F3 29480 1.018 -14740
M0LF 31134 0.964 -15567
M0RT 30792 0.974 -15396
M0SD 31110 0.964 -15555
R0F1 31059 0.966 -15529
R0F2 30058 0.998 -15029
R0F3 29953 1.002 -14977
R0LF 30794 0.974 -15397
R0RT 31050 0.966 -15525
R0SD 30282 0.991 -15141
L1UL 29222 1.027 -14611
L1LL 30117 0.996 -15059
L1UR 25735 1.166 -12868
L1LR 22721 1.320 -11361
L2UL 21334 1.406 -10667
L2LL 24582 1.220 -12291
L2UR 21223 1.414 -10612
L2LR 20325 1.476 -10163

I entered the gains, checked that all the outputs were right (should be 15000*0.023333=350) and redid the safe.snap.