LOG-IN
Displaying reports 2421-2440 of 3128.Go to page Start 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 End
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 22:39, Wednesday 06 June 2018 (801)Get code to link to this report
Some number and suggestion from Tomura-san for fiber

The expected beam diameter for our case is calculated like this:

D = 4*lambda(1064nm)*f(11mm)/(pi*MFD(6.2um)) = 2.4mm

 

 

We also received some suggestions from Tomura-san,

1. Check to meet the NA's requirement. (Tomura-san told us basically that is all)

        NA of lens: lambda/(pi*(MFD/2)) = 0.11

        NA of fiber(HI-1060-Flex): 0.14 (from manual)

   From this point of view, we are fine.

2. He also thinks we need to notice if we damage the fiber, if we bend it too much. Our complicated collimator (more complicated than Tomura-san's) can make couple more difficult.

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 19:01, Wednesday 06 June 2018 (800)Get code to link to this report
recheck of laser parameter

Since we find the beam parameter changed because we change the laser power, we did the beam parameter measurement again. Now the power of laser is 277mW.

from laser head cm

beam diameter1 um beam diameter2 um
34 1975 1848
29 1801 1683
24 1643 1527
19 1421 1371
14 1274 1194

result 1: 183um at -0.19m

result 2: 201um at -0.20m

mean: 192um at -0.195m

Comments related to this report
EleonoraCapocasa - 11:46, Thursday 07 June 2018 (802)

This is for AUX 1, the laser that will be used for the coherent control. A first characterization was done and reported in entry 666. It seems compatible with the new measurement. 

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 17:48, Wednesday 06 June 2018 (799)Get code to link to this report
Beam Profiler Threshold

Seris number: BM-3 UV.

Without filter, it is 0.1W/cm2.

With filter, it is 20W/cm2.

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 19:39, Wednesday 30 May 2018 (795)Get code to link to this report
Check beam parameter and try to align fiber again

After check everything is fine, I proceed to put 98:2 and total reflect mirror.(As attached Fig. 1)

1. I checked the beam parameter, we want beam raidus as 1450um. But we have only 1100um now. (See Fig. 2) I am wondering why it doesn't match the simulation in e-log 791. Here the power should not influence a lot. Because I just increase it from 10mW to 30mW. This is confusing.

2. I tried to align the beam to fiber. I got only 30uW (total is 11mW), means only 0.3% couple. I have tried my best. On the multi-meter, the shown number is very stable(I didn't use 50Om). But the shown number on the power meter is changing a lot. (See Fig3 and 4)

Images attached to this report
795_20180530123813_740065252.jpg 795_20180530123831_1451848695.jpg 795_20180530123845_67611159.jpg 795_20180530123904_70118517.jpg
KAGRA MIR (Absorption)
Print this report.
ManuelMarchio - 14:46, Wednesday 30 May 2018 (794)Get code to link to this report
Simulations: comparison of silica with sapphire

Improved the simulations. Instead of calculating the temperature at fixed times, I calculated the real part and the imaginary part of the temperature. In this way, the time dependence is given by the rotation of the phasor on the complex plane.
Then I calculated the propagation of the probe through the real part an through the imaginary part of the temperature distribution. These two separate propagations give two values on the photodetector. One is the real part of the signal and one is the imaginary part. Putting these two values together in the complex plane we get the modulus and the phase of the signal. Doing this for each position of the sample we get the scan of the AC signal and of the phase. See the plot.

In the plot there is the comparison of two scans of the same sample, same thickness, same absorption rate, same incident power, but made of different materials: Silica and Sapphire. The sapphire sample looks shorter because the angle inside the sample is smaller (snell's law). The AC signal is smaller because the sapphire diffusivity is higher. The ratio between the two AC signals is 3.7. The phase difference is 33°

Images attached to this report
794_20180530074641_comparisonsapphiresilica633acphase8mm.png
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 14:09, Wednesday 30 May 2018 (793)Get code to link to this report
Got s polarization and check high power

After found a half waveplate in TAMA(it is a square one as in attached Fig.1), I used it to rotate the polarization of the output of FI.

After increasing laser power around 300mW,

     I checked the power before and after FI(see Fig.2 and Fig.3). The ratio is 90.55%(=280.8mW(detect after FI)/310.1mW(detect after the first lens)).

     The light comeing from the side of FI is really not a point. So it is very diffcult to detect it. Roughtly there is 7mW coming out from output side port, 3mW from input side port.

     I checked the p-polarization portion is 113.4uW, s-polarization portion is 235mW.(The total power sending to PBS is 245.9mW, this means we lose a lot of light by half waveplate and focal lens)

The maximun power we can reach for our laser is around 600mW.

Images attached to this report
793_20180530043024_1577796977.jpg 793_20180530043529_1938432464.jpg 793_20180530043547_508962612.jpg
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 18:09, Tuesday 29 May 2018 (792)Get code to link to this report
Direct observation of beam shaking caused by AOM modulation

Today I check the beam shaking at another place, as shown in attached Fig. 1. I compared it with the calculation I did with ABCD matrix.(Fig. 2 The result is 0.00059) However, the result doesn't match the measurment(Fig. 3 this value should ccrrespond to 0.000142). I will try to find why my code is wrong.

I also measured the noise spectrum in low frequency, as shown in Fig. 4 and 5. As told by Matteo, our loop can sense the beam shaking as a length shaking. So we can see the noise level is increased.

So I decided to take the video of this shaking on the first iris in the vacuum tube between IM and EM.

(Video is here)https://drive.google.com/open?id=1jNG-MD1ATfqfCkNuEixQux5IXnzmwJTk

Images attached to this report
792_20180529105657_1791942919.jpg 792_20180529110819_49.png 792_20180529110829_1115391880.jpg 792_20180529110947_396025002.jpg 792_20180529111002_1501931458.jpg
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 17:16, Tuesday 29 May 2018 (791)Get code to link to this report
Installation of Faraday Isolator(FI), wave plate and telescope

Participaint: Eleonora, Yuhang and Matteo

Motivation: Last week, we achieved the coupling of laser to fiber up to 50 percent. However, we find it has a large fluctuation. We guessed it might be caused by the back reflection laser. Anyway, we need to have this FI.

Simulation: I designed how to put them so that we can have a output beam which can match collimator and fiber. I also checked the beam going into FI is much smaller than the aperture of FI(5mm). See attached Figure. 1.

Installation: I collected all the necessary components and put them in sequency. I also checked the beam after the last lens seems fine. But I found the second half-wave plate is broken. I mean we cannot rotate it, so we cannot change polarization. I will change it tomorrow and make the light s-polarization. See attached Fig. 2.

Result:

The transmission of FI is 12.71/14.07 = 90.33%. See attached Fig. 3 and 4.

I used roughly 33 cm of space.

Images attached to this report
791_20180529101441_1806717843.jpg 791_20180529101539_1209742968.jpg 791_20180529111032_170383654.jpg 791_20180529111046_182352480.jpg
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 14:34, Monday 28 May 2018 (790)Get code to link to this report
Comment to The misalignment effect brought by AOM modulation (Click here to view original report: 778)

I find there is a mistake in the calculation, see attached picture 1. I used a wrong unit for a number. After the correction, I plot the result again(see attached picture 2)

Now the error on AOM is 1.07mrad.

Images attached to this comment
790_20180528073345_77820180516142813474292500.jpg 790_20180528073409_aomcorrect.png
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 10:11, Monday 28 May 2018 (789)Get code to link to this report
Propagate the AOM dithering to IM of Filter Cavity

By using ABCD matrix, I propogate the AOM dithering from AOM to filter cavity import mirror. Here we modulate AOM with a very large amplitude (2MHz) and small velocity.

In this case, I got the result of 0.012m dithering on AOM.

The calculation is attached.

Images attached to this report
789_20180528031050_28.png
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 22:54, Thursday 24 May 2018 (786)Get code to link to this report
Comment to The misalignment effect brought by AOM modulation (Click here to view original report: 778)

The serial number of AOM is MT110-A1.5-VIS. I checked the manual today. The best input modulation voltage is 1V. There is also one information about the seperation angle's relationship with wavelength. However, the manual is so sketchy that I cannot understand clearly. 

Bad thing: The operating manual is only availabe for someone has account of that company!

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 22:22, Thursday 24 May 2018 (785)Get code to link to this report
Comment to Installation of telescope for fiber (Click here to view original report: 784)

Today, We tried to use smaller value of beam radius. I found that this can make coupling better. From 0.1mV to 0.2mV. The input laser is 5mW.

The fiber detector(DET01CFC/M) is 3.5V(5.5mW), that means we have 0.0003mW comes out from fiber now. This is definitly smaller than the case of last week. The coupling is only 0.01% now.

The procedure I did is like this:

1. Without inserting fiber, check the laser is almost going through the center of collimator.

2. Insert the fiber to collamitor, then adjust the x and y of collimator.

3. At the same time, use multi-meter to monitor the fiber detector(without using 50 Om). Until the voltage goes beyond the range of multi-meter, we start to use 50 Om.

4.Now you will 0.1mV on the multi-meter. Usually, this is the time to use two sterring mirrors to maximaze the coupling.

I did this procedure many times, but still the best result is 0.2mV. It seems something maybe wrong. 

(By the way, I spoke a wrong thing during today's optics meeting. When we can read 0.1mV on multi-meter, the output of fiber is very weak! I am so sorry that I remember something wrong!)

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 11:17, Thursday 24 May 2018 (784)Get code to link to this report
Installation of telescope for fiber

Yesterday, we installed a telescope in front of the collimator of fiber. The purpose is to make the output of this telescope have the same beam radius ( roughlty, r=1500um )with the output of fiber.(the simulation of telescope is in Fig.3)

However, during the simulation and installation of this telescope, we found the result doesn't agree with what we found in practise. We measured the beam parameter of AUX1 again.(the parameter of AUX1 is shown in attached Fig.1, we should say that the origin of this measurement is the head of laser box)

Images attached to this report
784_20180524041048_1683317332.jpg 784_20180524041059_1732645629.jpg 784_20180524041703_1769583675.jpg
Comments related to this report
YuhangZhao - 22:22, Thursday 24 May 2018 (785)

Today, We tried to use smaller value of beam radius. I found that this can make coupling better. From 0.1mV to 0.2mV. The input laser is 5mW.

The fiber detector(DET01CFC/M) is 3.5V(5.5mW), that means we have 0.0003mW comes out from fiber now. This is definitly smaller than the case of last week. The coupling is only 0.01% now.

The procedure I did is like this:

1. Without inserting fiber, check the laser is almost going through the center of collimator.

2. Insert the fiber to collamitor, then adjust the x and y of collimator.

3. At the same time, use multi-meter to monitor the fiber detector(without using 50 Om). Until the voltage goes beyond the range of multi-meter, we start to use 50 Om.

4.Now you will 0.1mV on the multi-meter. Usually, this is the time to use two sterring mirrors to maximaze the coupling.

I did this procedure many times, but still the best result is 0.2mV. It seems something maybe wrong. 

(By the way, I spoke a wrong thing during today's optics meeting. When we can read 0.1mV on multi-meter, the output of fiber is very weak! I am so sorry that I remember something wrong!)

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
MarcEisenmann - 17:38, Monday 21 May 2018 (783)Get code to link to this report
Comment to FC scan (Click here to view original report: 776)

The total amount of power not coupled inside the FC is composed of the mode-mismatch and the sidebands.

The sidebands maximum are respectively : 0.1462 and 0.1422 mV (this takes into account the background value).

This means that 11.84% of the light is not coupled inside the FC.

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
Matteo Barsuglia - 05:58, Friday 18 May 2018 (782)Get code to link to this report
Comment to Comparison of old and new servo (Click here to view original report: 760)

I think there is a factor 2 missing in the formula: the pole of the cavity is FSR/(2*F) = 500000/(2*4355) = 57 Hz

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 22:50, Wednesday 16 May 2018 (781)Get code to link to this report
Measurement of contrast of MZ after installation of mode cleaner

After the installation of mode cleaner, we measure the contrast again. This method is like this

We use the high voltage driver of MZ as an offset adder. By giving different offset to it, we can have almost all light transmit or almost no light transmit.

Then we record the highest peak hight while almost all light transmit. Record the highest peak hight while almost no light transmit(actually, this is the time when TEM00 almost vanishes).

We got result like attached picture 1.

However, I don't know if this is the right calculation method. (Maybe I should do like Marc did for FC scan, intergrate all the peaks in-between a FSR?)

Images attached to this report
781_20180516155005_contrast.png
R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 21:45, Wednesday 16 May 2018 (780)Get code to link to this report
Comment to Comparison of old and new servo (Click here to view original report: 760)

Corresponding to the comment of Eleonora, the bandwidth of filter cavity for infrared is 114Hz but not 55Hz. Then I think we can explain the result (almost).

bandwidth=FSR/Finesse=500000/4355=114

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 21:40, Wednesday 16 May 2018 (779)Get code to link to this report
Comment to FC scan (Click here to view original report: 776)

According to the signal we send to DDS board, the modulation frequency of we give to EOM is 15.2MHz. The FSR is 0.5MHz.

15.2/0.5=30.4

So we will have additional 0.4 of FSR. This exactly explains the result we have on the oscilloscope.

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuhangZhao - 21:29, Wednesday 16 May 2018 (778)Get code to link to this report
The misalignment effect brought by AOM modulation

Participaint: Marc, Matteo

We used PSD(position sensitivite detector) to detect the beam dittering incured by AOM modulation.

The modulation information of AOM: 2MHz(pk-pk), 10Hz(50ms for a half period). This gives us AOM scanning velocity of 40MHz/s. (this is really a fast scan!)

We put PSD inbetween the telescope after AOM. Although this gives us diffcuilty, but this is the only proper place to put PSD. See attached picture 1 to know how can we propagate the dittering back through the lens.

The calibration we use the result of entry 276. It is 0.0071[m/V]. We use it to transfer the voltage change of PSD to the beam dittering in meter.(Then we got "x" in attached picture 1)

 

Conclusion: See attached picture 2. We have 10.7e-6[rad] angle change corresponding to frequency change of 2MHz.

Images attached to this report
778_20180516142813_474292500.jpg 778_20180516142827_aom.png
Comments related to this report
YuhangZhao - 22:54, Thursday 24 May 2018 (786)

The serial number of AOM is MT110-A1.5-VIS. I checked the manual today. The best input modulation voltage is 1V. There is also one information about the seperation angle's relationship with wavelength. However, the manual is so sketchy that I cannot understand clearly. 

Bad thing: The operating manual is only availabe for someone has account of that company!

YuhangZhao - 14:34, Monday 28 May 2018 (790)

I find there is a mistake in the calculation, see attached picture 1. I used a wrong unit for a number. After the correction, I plot the result again(see attached picture 2)

Now the error on AOM is 1.07mrad.

R&D (FilterCavity)
Print this report.
YuefanGuo - 18:50, Wednesday 16 May 2018 (777)Get code to link to this report
Couple beam into the fiber progress

Participants: Yuhang, Yuefan, Matteo

Today we tried again to couple the laser beam into the fiber.

But first, we moved the two steering mirrors and collimator closer to each other. Since the further the distance, every time the movement on the collimator input is larger.

Then by adjusting the two steering mirrors and the x, y screws of the collimator, we are able to reach 10V(maximum) on the photodiode which corresponds to 5.5mW which is even larger than the input laser power.

We found out this is because the oscilloscope has a high impedance which will amplify the power. So we add a 50ohm resistor and we could get 10% beam power coupled into the fiber and after that, it became difficult to improve more.

According to Thorlab website, this collimator should have 2.09mm at the output, but now with a 200mm focal length just after the laser output, we have a beam at the collimator around 400um in radius.

So we did a bit simulation, in order to get the right size of the beam we should combine one -100mm and one 200mm lens. We will try to change the setup tomorrow.