Reports 1-1 of 1 Clear search Modify search
AdV-SVS (Pre-commissioning)
guo, mehmet, vahlbruch, vardaro, zendri - 23:49 Thursday 15 September 2022 (57067) Print this report
FIS from delay line characterization with green pump power scan

The aim of the today shift was characterize the FIS only on EQB1 with the beam folded only in EQB1. In this way we could have an estimation of the losses and the phase noise only on EQB1 in order to compare it with the measurement performed on Tuesday with FDS (losses 17 +/-4% phase noise 73+/-27 mrad).

First of all we went in DET lab to realign the delay line M4X was at the end of range (completely unscrewed) and stucked. We had to use some force to unlock it. We aligned the delay line by hand befor looking the cameras (SC and LO), then observing the 4MHz magnitude in the HD DIFF RF channel (LO + SQZ,CC - Sc shuttered). Then we performed the fine tuning acting on the Thorlabs actuators of DL M4 and DL M5. 

We took a shot noise reference at 12:20:00 UTC and at 15:40:00 UTC. We checked the 1-3 kHz rms channel and we measured 0.0±0.1 dB.

Then we started with the measurements

Mz Offset Parametric Gain CC Open ASQZ GPS ASQZ phi ASQZ mag ASQZ level SQZ GPS SQZ phi SQZ mag SQZ level Notes
0 9.09/3.02=3.00=9.57dB 12:34:00 UTC 12:24:51 UTC 0.9 rad 9.05 mV 9.0±0.1 dB 12:30:35 UTC 2.15 rad 3.17 mV 6.4±0.2 dB at least 2 min
0.05 10.001/2.99=3.34=10.48 dB 13:11:00 UTC 12:54:30 UTC 0.85 rad 9.97 mV 10.1±0.1 dB 13:06:30 UTC 2.27 rad 3.05 mV 6.7±0.2 dB at least 2 min
0.1 10.93/2.91=3.75=11.5 dB 13:54:10 UTC 13:35:40 UTC 0.83 rad 10.7 mV 11.1±0.1 dB 13:47:30 UTC 2.25 rad 2.97 mV 6.8±0.3 dB at least 2 min
-0.05 8.18/3.16=2.588=8.25 dB 14:36:30 UTC 14:27:54 UTC 0.85 rad 8.15 mV 7.8±0.1 dB 14:33:00 UTC 2.2 rad 3.25 mV 5.8±0.1 dB at least 2 min
-0.065 8.13/3.32=2.45= 7.79dB 15:36:30 UTC 15:10:30 UTC 0.8 rad 8.05 mV 7.5±0.1 dB 15:18:00 UTC 2.3 rad 3.34 mV 5.70.1 dB at least 2 min

 We alalyzed the data (fig 1) and we obtained 11±1% of losses and 53±6 mrad of phase noise. The difference in losses between the measurement of the filter cavity is 6±2% that is compatible with the 4% of propagation losses measured with and without the Delay Line. The known losses on EQB1 are:

  • 1% FI and HWP
  • 2% from clearence
  • 1% of escape efficiency 
  • 4% from visibility
  • 1% of HD quantum efficiency

----------------------------------------------------

    9% of known losses, i.e 2% of unkown losses. To be check if some clip on delay line was present.

The found shot noise is higher than expected. After the pump power scan we did the following tests:

  • with MZ offset = 0V we tried to measure the SQZ level with the MAIN PLL unlocked and with the MAIN PLL locked. We found no difference, i.e. the phase noise from the INJ-DET fiber is not the major contribution of the excess of phase noise
  • we tried to change the gain and the shape of the coherent control filter. We measure an increase of a factor 2 of the phase noise (in loop) but we don't see the same change in the level of SQZ (fig 2) 
  • We measure the in loop phase noise with the same gain of CC=300 (used for the point MZ offset = 0) and we obtained 3mrad in the bandwidth 0-5khz and 9mrad in the bandwidt 0-250 kHz. The calibration factor was 8.8mV/rad. Fig 3

Other investigations on phase noise will follow tomorrow.

Images attached to this report
Comments to this report:
vahlbruch, vardaro, zendri - 23:53 Friday 16 September 2022 (57082) Print this report

Today we continued to characterize the SQZ from the delay line trying to better understand the excess of phase noise.

  • we measured the sensing noise of the CC loop, i.e. the spectrum of the signal EQB1_HD_CC_Err_pre with the IR_Shutter closed (only LO on HD detector). We compared it to the spectrum of the same signal with the CC loop closed (LO+SQZ+CC beams on HD). The shutter was closed at 08:56:27 UTC. We can see that above 50 Hz the loop is not limited by the sensing noise (Fig. 1)
  • Secondly we wanted to measure if the HD CMRR was still good. To do it we did the following things:
    • Measure the HD Diff channel gain wrt the sum gain G*(PD1-PD2)/(PD1+PD2)=G if PD2=0. This could be obtained by shuttering the light in front of PD2, i.e. putting EQB1_HD_MIR to deflect the beam toward PD2. HD MIR was put at 09:04:09 UTC. Difference gain in figure 2, we measured 2.1.
    • We removed HD MIR 09:09:00 UTC and we measure the CMRR doing the transfer function DIF/SUM. We measured a CMRR of 42 dB, but this measurement was not good because we where not injecting common mode noise into the HD Path.
    • We injected 0.0005 V of white noise into the LO PZT (HD CC actuator), we excited the sum by a factor 50. Fig 3. We choose the amplitude of the noise in order to have a linear response between HD SUM and noise level. With this noise we measured a CMRR of 66 dB (09:28:02 UTC). But we found a coherence between sum and difference of 0.4.
    • We injected 0,00025 V of white noise 09:36:40 UTC. Now the coherence is 0.12 but the CMRR remained quite the same 64 dB
    • We injected 0.000125 V of noise 09:39:00 UTC. The coherence was 0.04 and the CMRR remained quite the same 62 dB. Thus we can infer that we have a CMRR > 60 dB. This is not limiting our measurement.
  • We checked also the HD Shot noise clearence: we measured before the spectrum of the HD DIFF AUDIO channel with only LO 09:55:30 UTC (shot noise) and than we closed the LO shutter at 09:57:45 UTC. We measured 23 dB of clearence (about 1% of losses), see fig 4.
  • The spectrum of 15th september Pump power scan, Fig 4 of previous entry, are filled of lines. We know from tapping tests in the past that some of them are due to vibrations of Mirrors mount. Thus we tried to insulate better the OPA from scattered light, i.e. we tried to rotate the HWP on EQB1 to improve the isolation factor of the EQB1 FI.
    • We started at  10:03:48 UTC and we measure 6.4 dB of SQZ and 9.1 dB of ASQZ at 10:12:42 UTC.
    • We moved +500 steps from the initial at 10:18:39 UTC and we worsened the situation, more peaks and 6.2 dB of SQZ
    • We moved other +500 steps 10:20:10 UTC, we measured 5.8 dB of SQZ and 9 dB of SQZ. The structures on the spectrum increased a lot. (Fig 5.)
    • We started to go in the opposite direction and after -2800 steps at  10:32:05 UTC we removed the peaks and we measured 6.7 dB of SQZ see figure 6. Then we tried to fine tune the HWP to see if we could improve again the situation.

After the HWP tuning we decided to do another  grenn pump power scan:

MZ offset Parametric Gain GPS CC Open GPS SQZ phi SQZ SQZ level GPS ASQZ phi ASQZ ASQZ level notes
0 V 9.19/3.125=2.94=9.4dB 11:31:15 UTC 11:23:50 UTC 2.25 rad 6.7±0.1 dB 11:28:43 UTC 0.86 rad 8.9±0.1 dB at least 2 min of spectra
0.05 V 10.03/3.065=3.27=10.3dB 13:32:15 UTC 13:12:50 UTC 2.25 rad 7.1±0.1 dB 13:17:10 UTC 0.86 rad 9.9±0.1 dB at least 2 min of spectra
0.1 V  10.82/2.87=3.77=11.5dB  12:36:35 UTC 12:27:30 UTC 2.2 rad 7.5±0.1 dB 12:32:10 UTC 0.92 rad 10.9±0.1 dB at least 2 min of spectra
-0.05 V 8.19/3.207=2.55=8.14dB 13:51:50 UTC 14:09:00 UTC 2.2 rad 5.8±0.1 dB 14:13:31 UTC 0.9 rad 7.5±0.1 dB strange point discarded in the analysis
-0.055 V  8.2/3.39=2.41=7.67 dB 16:06:50 UTC  15:28:52 UTC 2.3 rad 5.8±0.1 dB 15:53:23 UTC 0.82 rad 7.3±0.1 dB at least 2 min of spectra

After the measurement we take a shot noise spectrum at 16:37:20 UTC.

We fitted the data (Fig 7) and we obtained 11.0±0.5 % of losses (as yesterday) with 14±12 mrad (about 4 time less than yesterday).

Fig 8 shows the spectra of the measurement that this time are flat. Note that the HP filter in the HD DIFF audio channel change the shot noise shape up to 50 Hz. We will correct the spectra with a correction function.

Next steps on SQZ measurements

  • we should understand if the LO scattered light scattered by HD PDs is the cause of the stray light. To do it we could measure SQZ by decreasing the LO power.
  • Repeat the mump power scan with the SQB1 back reflecor. Here we can add an additional FI, thus we can see if adding a faraday, more isolation for the OPA, it is possible to improve again the measurements.

Tuning of GR Automation parameters

During the measurement we also changed some parameter of the automation SQZ_FLT. This was done without passing through git.

  • The gain of the BPC (weight of GR_M5 and GR_M7 BPC_2) was decreased from -1 to -0.2 (factor 5)
  • In the function that checks the green transmission we change the factor 0.9 in a factor 0.5
  • In the function that checks the green AA we changed the thresholds from 1 to 10
  • In the function that checks the green BPC2 we changed the thresholds from 0.4 to 20 

After this change the cavity remained locked for more time without  unlock for the thresholds too narrow ( we had a very windi condition). Moreover the BPC gain lowered by a factor 5 helped a lot to avoid misalagnement of the cavity between a lock and the following one. The threshold should be better tuned the next week.

Images attached to this comment
vardaro - 12:03 Saturday 17 September 2022 (57087) Print this report

This morning after the MZ offset was set again at 0V I realigned the DL and I measured again SQZ=6.6dB and ASQZ=8.8dB. I left the system with the DL in SQZ to check the stability.

I added the point of this morning in the yesterday plot of pump power scan and it is compatible with the others I obtained from the fit 10.8±0.3% and phase noise 18±9mrad.

Due to the high wind I left the SQZ_FLT node in DOWN. I also discharged the offload and realigned the system after it.

Images attached to this comment
Search Help
×

Warning

Error

The present report has been modified outside this window. Please check for its integrity in the main page.

Refreshing this page will move this report into drafts.

×