Reports 1-1 of 1 Clear search Modify search
IOO (OMC)
yutaro.enomoto - 21:47 Saturday 06 July 2019 (9428) Print this report
Cavity scan of OMC using the beam from ITMX or ITMY

Valera, Keiko, Yutaro

We performed the cavity scan of OMC with OMC REFL PD online.
In summary, we found two things:
1. There are so many higher order modes within one FSR. Sum of the power of those modes almost reaches 100% of the input power, indicating that the impedence matching condition of OMC is more or less OK.
2. The HOM distribution of the beam from ITMX and ITMY looked quite similar. There should be some common source of the distortion of the beam.

= What we did =
- aligned the beam to OMC, by maximizing the transmission power. Eventually we reached the alignment where the beam was hitting on the center of both OMC QPDs.
- (However, good alignment in terms of the build-up resulted in clipped REFL.)
- First we scanned OMC length with the beam from ITMX. P2P amplitude of the scan was 2 FSRs.
- Second we did the same for the beam from ITMY.

= Results =
- Transmission. Two FSRs in 5 sec. They looked very similar.

- Reflection PD. At maximum, the reflection power dropped by ~10%, which is consistent with the fact that the transmission is 10 % at maximum. This indicates that there is no significant loss inside the cavity.

Images attached to this report
Comments to this report:
keiko.kokeyama - 22:37 Monday 08 July 2019 (9437) Print this report

Very rough finesse estimation from this scan data is 260 +- 20%. From data taken on 06/19, it's ~220 +- 20%.

yoichi.aso - 0:32 Tuesday 09 July 2019 (9440) Print this report

If the finesse of the OMC is actually about 200, this could explain the 10% transmittance.

Assuming that originally, the OMC input/output mirrors had 99.6% reflectivity (finesse = 800), if we assign 8000ppm of loss on the reflectance of both the mirrors, we will get a finesse of 260 and the expected cavity transmittance is about 10%.

Maybe the mirrors are contaminated ?

Search Help
×

Warning

×