LOG-IN
Displaying reports 701-720 of 3244.Go to page Start 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 End
KAGRA MIR (Absorption)
Print this report.
MarcEisenmann - 16:50, Friday 20 May 2022 (2949)Get code to link to this report
start of AZTEC #3

Marc Matteo

We removed FC from the AZTEC #3.

Note that the imaging unit black cover was modified so that we don't need anymore to disconnect the cables.

We checked the bulk reference sample and measured R = 0.5794 cm/W with Pin = 27.67 mW and Pt = 15.06 mW.

It is still consistent with previous estimation so we installed the AZTEC #3 on the translation stage.

We did a long z scan and estimated the 2 surfaces at z = 26.05 and 114.5 mm so that z_center = 70.275 mm

We started XY measurement at Z_center.

From the long z scan, absorption seems promising.

KAGRA MIR (General)
Print this report.
MarcEisenmann - 19:03, Tuesday 17 May 2022 (2948)Get code to link to this report
Check of setup and AZTEC #1 restarted

Marc, Matteo

Today we removed AZTEC #2 and installed the bulk reference sample.

We measured R = 0.5780 cm/W which is compatible with previous measurement within 5%.

This is reasonable so AZTEC #2 measurements are fine.

We used again first contact on the AZTEC #3 as there was some remained of the previously applied first contact and peeled.

Note for future to never use the sticky tape given by first contact.

We also applied first contact on the second surface of the 1.5 inch sapphire used for calibration.

We cutted holes in the black box covering the imaging unit in order to avoid to have to remove the cables every time we want to intall/remove KAGRA size substrates.

We started measurement of AZTEC #1 at exactly the same position as before (XY map at Z center).

Measurement is on-going but preliminary results seems compatible with previous measurements meaning that they should be fine.

KAGRA MIR (Absorption)
Print this report.
MarcEisenmann - 18:59, Tuesday 17 May 2022 (2947)Get code to link to this report
AZTEC #2

Report of AZTEC #2 absorption measurements.

For reference the arrow is on top pointing towards the imaging unit.

Absorption is larger than AZTEC #1 and we can also quite clearly see the growing seed on the xy2 map (fig 2 that is measured at the z center of the substrate)

Images attached to this report
2947_20220517115839_xy1.png 2947_20220517115843_xy2.png 2947_20220517115846_xy3.png 2947_20220517115850_xz.png 2947_20220517115854_yz.png
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
RyutaroTakahashi - 19:49, Monday 16 May 2022 (2946)Get code to link to this report
Comment to One magnet of PR mirror was fixed (Click here to view original report: 2945)

Two photos (under gluing and after gluing) are attached.

Images attached to this comment
2946_20220516124908_prgluing.jpg 2946_20220516124929_prgluingafter.jpg
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
NaokiAritomi - 16:49, Monday 16 May 2022 (2945)Get code to link to this report
One magnet of PR mirror was fixed

[Takahashi, Aritomi, Marc]

We opened PR chamber and fixed one falling magnet of PR mirror and released the suspension. During this work, we noticed the oplev laser was hitting off center of PR mirror. We aligned the oplev laser to make it center of PR mirror. Currently the oplev beam is not reaching the PD and we need to align it.

We will open BS chamber on Friday next week (5/27).

Comments related to this report
RyutaroTakahashi - 19:49, Monday 16 May 2022 (2946)

Two photos (under gluing and after gluing) are attached.

KAGRA MIR (Scattering)
Print this report.
DanChen - 07:33, Monday 16 May 2022 (2944)Get code to link to this report
Laser scattering measurement

Date: 2022/5/13

With Homare Abe and Takayuki Tomaru

At KAGRA

  • We took pictures of 2 sapphire samples with a green injection laser beam:
    • One of them showed a green scattering light
    • The other one showed a red scattering light
  • We also took pictures of ITMY mirror with the same green injection laser beam:
    • The results showed a green scattering light

Analysis will be performed.

Pictures: klog

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
MarcEisenmann - 18:15, Friday 13 May 2022 (2943)Get code to link to this report
Recovery of FC (2)

Aritomi, Marc, Michael

 

We installed the new picomotors drivers. They worked fine for PR picomotor but did not work for BS picomotor.

We need to open BS chamber to check the picomotors.

With PR picomotors, we recovered the old reference in BS chamber (eg in elog 2794). In that configuration (and maybe BS in a 'random' position, the green beam is hitting quite below the gate valve window between BS/input but at least we don't have anymore clipping).

However, the PR oplev laser is now hitting the edge of the steering mirror before the PSD. It means that the PR reference at BS chamber that we are using might not be valid anymore for the current alignment inside the PR chamber.

We realigned PR and END oplevs and ran the coil health check codes.

All magnets of PR, INPUT and END mirrors are fine except PR H2 and we can not assess BS situation as the oplev PSD is broken as reported in elog2775.

We found a spare PSD inside the cleanroom and tested its dark noise (see attached figure where red and blue curves are the dark noise).

It is fine so we plan to replace it after the recovery of BS picomotors.

Images attached to this report
2943_20220513130354_11608.jpg
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
NaokiAritomi - 17:56, Friday 13 May 2022 (2942)Get code to link to this report
Comment to Recovery of FC (Click here to view original report: 2940)

Since the beam spot at GV between BS/input depends on both PR and BS, we should align PR and BS at the same time by using the GV between BS/input and the first target as references.

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
NaokiAritomi - 19:36, Thursday 12 May 2022 (2940)Get code to link to this report
Recovery of FC

[Aritomi, Michael]

We found that one of the green references at PR chamber was not aligned as shown in Fig. 1, which means we need to align the green injection beam. We removed the cover of the optical bench and aligned the green injection beam as shown in Fig. 2.

Then we aligned PR to make the green beam at the center of GV between BS/input. However, in this situation, the green beam at PR reference in BS chamber is clipped by a mirror behind the BS as shown in Fig. 3,4.

Images attached to this report
2940_20220512123618_fig1.jpg 2940_20220512123627_fig2.jpg 2940_20220512123632_fig3.jpg 2940_20220512123639_fig4.jpg
Comments related to this report
NaokiAritomi - 17:56, Friday 13 May 2022 (2942)

Since the beam spot at GV between BS/input depends on both PR and BS, we should align PR and BS at the same time by using the GV between BS/input and the first target as references.

KAGRA MIR (Absorption)
Print this report.
MarcEisenmann - 17:19, Thursday 12 May 2022 (2939)Get code to link to this report
start of AZTEC #2 absorption measurement

Marc, Matteo

 

Following the recovery of the PCI, we installed the AZTEC #2 sample.

First we measured X_center = 400.735 mm, Y_center = 122.105 mm.

We did a long z scan and got the 2 surfaces at z = 26.28 mm and 119 mm meaning that Z_center = 72.64 mm.

We have incident power = 7.69W  and transmitted power = 6.636W.

We started a XY measurement at Z_center and hope to finish all 5 maps by monday.

Images attached to this report
2939_20220512101828_longzscan.png
KAGRA MIR (General)
Print this report.
MarcEisenmann - 17:16, Thursday 12 May 2022 (2938)Get code to link to this report
Check of the pci setup

Marc Matteo

This entry summarizes these past days activities.

 

We found a mistake in the fitting code (the wavelength was hard coded to 633 nm instead of 1064 nm making the previous estimation wrong by a factor sqrt(1064/633))

To avoid this issue, we coded a more flexible function 'fit_blade.m' that is saved in the PCI scripts folder on the desktop

With this function, we could finally tuned the pump beam telescope and recover Manuel's parameters (fig 1)

We also check the vertical and horizontal angle of incidence to be -0.2 deg and 2.5 deg respectively.

We also checked the probe beam parameters by placing a power meter in front of the absorption PD.

We also got same parameters as Manuel (fig 2)

The angle of incidence is 3.47 deg meaning that the relative angle between the probe and pump beam is also correct.

 

We installed the surface reference sample and tried to maximize the R coefficient by changing both the translation stage and imaging unit z positions.

While doing these motions, we could find the expected maximum at x = 35 mm and z_iu = 68 mm.

However, R = 14 /W meaning that we still had not optimal conditions.

After investigating other possible issues (chopper frequency, laser power, pd, lock-in are all fine) and repeating several times this calibration, we could not improved this value by much...

We installed the bulk reference sample and got R = 0.5536 cm/W.

Both surface and bulk calibration are 10 % lower than expected but the reason is still not clear to us...

 

We decided to use the 1.5 inches sapphire that Manuel used to check the setup calibration (eg check entry 1132).

We did the exact same measurement and got similar values (fig 3)  : mean absorption ~ 40 ppm/cm.

However, the sample was really dirty so it we cleaned this sample by wiping alcohol on it and repeated the measurement that gave identical result (fig 4)

 

It means that despite some issue with the setup, our calibration gives us reasonable results and can be considered to be working again.

Images attached to this report
2938_20220512101306_20220510pumpprofile.jpg 2938_20220512101318_20220511probeprofile.jpg 2938_20220512101458_15inchdirty.png 2938_20220512101503_15inchcleaned.png
KAGRA MIR (General)
Print this report.
MarcEisenmann - 19:29, Monday 09 May 2022 (2937)Get code to link to this report
Check of pump beam

Today I installed the razor blade that cuts the beam vertically and measured the pump beam parameter.

The blade is at 90 mm from the edge of the breadboard and I used about 100 mW of input power.

I measured a waist size of 22 um at 58 mm (in Manuel's unit) while we expect 36 um at 61 mm.

I started the tuning of the telescope but it is not concluded yet.

Images attached to this report
2937_20220509122933_20220509pumpprofilebefore.jpg
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
NaokiAritomi - 15:27, Monday 09 May 2022 (2936)Get code to link to this report
Subtraction of dark noise from locking accuracy measurement

I subtracted the dark noise from the locking accuracy measurement done in elog2864. I calculated sqrt(locking accuracy^2-dark noise^2). In the point where the dark noise is larger than the locking accuracy, the subtraction is set to 0. The rms after the subtraction is almost the same as one before subtraction.

Images attached to this report
2936_20220509082738_ccfclockingaccuracy20220303subtraction.png
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 17:07, Wednesday 27 April 2022 (2935)Get code to link to this report
Some checking reference for beam position on filter cavity iris inside the arm

We have two iris inside filter cavity arm to check the direction of green laser beam. To make sure the beam can arrive at the filter cavity end mirror, we need to make the green beam hit on a point checked in the past when filter cavity is aligned.

Remember that, for the first step, we should make the green beam hit on several reference points on PR and BS chambers.

The first attached picture shows the beam position on the first iris. In this case, the iris needs to be rotated so that the stick is not visible (hidden on the back side of iris). At this moment, the beam position should be just above the hole.

For the first iris, when the stick is visible, the situation is shown in Fig. 2. At this moment, the beam is above the hole and located a bit the left side.

If the beam hits on the first iris like what is shown here, it should be not diffcult to find the green beam on the second iris. If not visible on the second iris, we should move the green beam around with little adjustment. Then what we need to do is to just make the green beam go through the hole of it.

Images attached to this report
2935_20220427095727_wechatimg46.jpeg 2935_20220427100236_wechatimg47.jpeg
KAGRA MIR (Scattering)
Print this report.
DanChen - 11:41, Wednesday 20 April 2022 (2934)Get code to link to this report
Test experiment for scattered light observation of sapphire

Information

Date: 14th Apr 2022

Members: Dan Chen, Satoru Ikeda

Place: Kamioka Hokubu-kaikan 1F meeting room

Background

The mirror substrates made for KAGRA O5 may have high internal scattering, and we are developing a simple measurement method for this purpose.
The idea is using a camera to take a picture.
At first we used a laser pointer (Green, 1mW) as a laser beam source and a sapphire sample from Mitaka to check the measurement principle.

Result

ASI camera (ASI224MC) is not suitable for this measurement because of the noise.
The reason can be the insufficient noise reduction in the camera or poor lens we used or both.

A digital camera (Canon EOS Kiss M2) successfully captured the scattered light from the sapphire sample with 61s exposure time and ISO6400.

Detail

Laser source

Model: UC-S1
Wave length: 532nm
Max power: 1mW

ASI camera

Camera: ASI 224MC
Lens: CCTV LENS 2.1mm 3MP
Application: Planetary Imager

Result: we tried several conditions for exposure time and gain, but the scattered light in the sample was not clear because of noise.

Digital camera

Camera: Canon EOS Kiss M2
Lens: EF-M15-45 F3.5-6.3 IS STM
Exposure time: 61s
ISO: 6400
Color temperature: 6000K
F: 16
Focus length: 45mm
Recorde image quality: best (about 15MB/picture)
Output image format: jpeg

Result:
With the above condition, the scattered light was observed. In order to make it clear, we took a picture with the Green laser ON and OFF, then we made a diff image using "imageJ". The diff image shows the internal scattered light clear.

What we learned:
Because the scattered light we want to measure is very faint, we need to avoid environmental light and stray/scattered light generated outside of the sapphire sample interfering with the measurement.

Images attached to this report
2934_20220420043952_img0865comp.jpg 2934_20220420044011_img0866comp.jpg 2934_20220420044016_substructrgbchannelscompcomp.png 2934_20220420044026_img6701comp.jpg
KAGRA MIR (Absorption)
Print this report.
MatteoLeonardi - 16:55, Tuesday 19 April 2022 (2933)Get code to link to this report
Comment to AZTEC #1 (KAGRA size) (Click here to view original report: 2919)

Additional maps.

Here the position and average.
Z=105.3, mean absorption: (61.6 +/- 13.95)
XZ map, mean absorption: (50.1 +/- 18.1)
YZ map, mean absorption: (56.8 +/- 19.1)

Images attached to this comment
2933_20220419095153_3.png 2933_20220419095203_xzmap.png 2933_20220419095221_yzmap.png
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
NaokiAritomi - 17:55, Monday 18 April 2022 (2932)Get code to link to this report
FC recovery trial

[Aritomi, Michael]

After opening the gate valves between input/end and arm, we tried to recover FC. We centered the PR reference and first target, but we could see only the scattered light at second target... We checked that the green beam is roughly center of the gate valve between BS/input with the PR reference.

Note: After the gate valve between BS/input is used as PR reference, don't forget to open the gate valve.

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
NaokiAritomi - 14:45, Monday 18 April 2022 (2931)Get code to link to this report
RF amplifier for AOM is working

In elog2865, it is reported that the RF amplifier (ZHL-2) for AOM stopped outputting. I checked the output of the RF amplifier and confirmed that it is working. I injected the input of 5.5dBm and the output of the amplifier is 23.4dBm, which is reasonable.

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
NaokiAritomi - 14:34, Monday 18 April 2022 (2930)Get code to link to this report
Comment to input/end chamber evacuation (Click here to view original report: 2929)

I opened the gate valves between input/end and arm. Before I opened the gate valve between input/arm, the pressure of input and arm were 1.2e-6 mbar and 3.7e-8 mbar, respectively. After I opened the gate valve, both of them became 1e-6 mbar. Before I opened the gate valve between end/arm, the pressure of end and arm were 2e-7 mbar and 1.5e-7 mbar, respectively. After I opened the gate valve between end/arm, the pressure of end and arm became 4e-7 mbar and 5.4e-7 mbar, respectively. 

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
NaokiAritomi - 19:03, Thursday 14 April 2022 (2929)Get code to link to this report
input/end chamber evacuation

[Aritomi, Michael]

We started the evacuation of input/end chambers. After evacuation with a rotary pump, we opened small gate valves close to input/end chambers. The current pressure of end chamber and arm are 3.7e-4 mbar and 3.4e-8 mbar, respectively. The current pressure of input chamber and arm are 4.1e-4 mbar and 3.1e-8 mbar, respectively. We will open small gate valves close to arm, and large gate valves between input/end and arm next week.

Comments related to this report
NaokiAritomi - 14:34, Monday 18 April 2022 (2930)

I opened the gate valves between input/end and arm. Before I opened the gate valve between input/arm, the pressure of input and arm were 1.2e-6 mbar and 3.7e-8 mbar, respectively. After I opened the gate valve, both of them became 1e-6 mbar. Before I opened the gate valve between end/arm, the pressure of end and arm were 2e-7 mbar and 1.5e-7 mbar, respectively. After I opened the gate valve between end/arm, the pressure of end and arm became 4e-7 mbar and 5.4e-7 mbar, respectively.