I collected the high-power coil driver (HPCD) from EYV (S1604763) and brought it back to Mozumi.
I collected the high-power coil driver (HPCD) from EYV (S1604763) and brought it back to Mozumi.
According to Saito-kun, HV amp (x10) was directly connected to the laser PZT input for the PLL lock. According to my past experiences, the direct connection tends to excite PZT at high frequency.
To solve this problem, we inserted a passive LPF that is set as one of the filters for the control servo between the PZT input and the HV. According to my memory, 10Hz ?? LPF and 100kHz?? LPF were used as one of the control filters. So what I can suggest is to set a passive LPF btw the PZT and the HV, and remove the same LPF in the control filters. I have a ponoma case and a film condenser (400V?) in my room.
Another concern is that the UGF at 10kHz for the PLL control might to excite some resonances of the PZT as in the main laser frequency stabilization servo.
I performed the initial alignment Xarm, Yarm, OMC, PRMI and SRY.
[Aritomi, Ushiba, Tanaka, Saito]
The sub-laser was injected into SRY, and the PLL was engaged while the LO frequency was swept to scan the beat signal. Using the maximum hold function of the Moku:Lab spectrum analyzer, the SRY transmitted power was recorded as a function of frequency. Because the slopes on the two sides of the resonance peak were different, the data were fitted both with and without a linear background offset. The two fitting methods yielded resonance frequencies differing by approximately 47.9 kHz. If this difference is regarded as the fitting uncertainty, it is comparable to the measurement uncertainty reported previously (klog:37191). The PLL UGF was then reduced to narrow the beat-signal linewidth, and the measurement and fitting procedure was repeated. However, the fitted resonance frequencies with and without a linear background offset differed by approximately 143 kHz, indicating that the fitting uncertainty was not improved. To achieve more accurate fitting, it will likely be necessary to suppress fluctuations in the beat-signal amplitude and reduce the influence of higher-order modes.
[Jinshui Tian, Yuli Liang, Dan Chen]
On 2026/07/09, we updated the Pcal Reconstruction model for both EX and EY so the output Pcal beam position is consistent with the calculation in the paper: Performance of the KAGRA photon calibrators during the fourth joint observing run with LIGO and Virgo - IOPscience.
We deployed the updated model files into the production environment via k1ctr27 (replacing the original files) and confirmed the GRD and SDF statuses.
We then recompiled, installed, and restarted the front-end models as follows:
EX Model (k1ex0):
ssh k1ex0
cdscode
make k1calex
make install-k1calex
startk1calex
EY Model (k1ey0):
ssh k1ey0
cdscode
make k1caley
make install-k1caley
startk1caley
From ndscope, observable value steps were noted on the following channels:
EX Channels: K1:CAL-PCAL_EX_A_X_MON & K1:CAL-PCAL_EX_A_Y_MON at GPS: 1467955200 s
EY Channels: K1:CAL-PCAL_EY_A_X_MON & K1:CAL-PCAL_EY_A_Y_MON at GPS: 1467956800 s
We plan to calculate and compare the pre- and post-update channel data tomorrow.
[ Yasui, Oshino, Nakagaki ]
We have installed a system to monitor the open/closed status of the manual gate valve between PRM and PR3.
The open/closed status is provided via the following PVs:
K1:VAC-GV_PR3_OPEN
K1:VAC-GV_PR3_CLOSE
These have also been added to the `VAC_OVERVIEW` MEDM screen.
Since we were unable to test the valve in the closed position today, we will conduct that test at a later date.
Because the LPD values went down in these days, Pcal GRD went to FAULT state today.
I think this is caused by the instability in the laser source.
So I changed the threshold value from 3.3 to 3.0.
I compared the spectra in the IRM damper servo ON/OFF again. The IP was excited in yaw with the IP actuators. The servo gain was increased from 1.5 to 2. Although the peak around 60 mHz was damped by the servo, the RMS reduction was small due to the resonance at 160mHz.
I collected the high-power coil drivers (HPCDs) from IXV (S1604827) and IYV (S1706250) and brought them back to Mozumi.
I collected the high-power coil driver (HPCD) from EYV (S1604763) and brought it back to Mozumi.
[Tanaka, Hirose, Fujimoto, Saito]
Following the same procedure as in the previous measurement (klog:37185), the lengths of PRY, SRY, and SRX were measured. The differences between the measured and design values were 0.6 ± 1.2 cm for PRY, 1.5 ± 1.3 cm for SRY, and 2.8 ± 1.6 cm for SRX. Therefore, the PRY measurement is consistent with the design value within the measurement uncertainty of 1.2 cm, whereas the differences for SRY and SRX exceed their respective uncertainties, suggesting that their actual lengths may differ from the design values.
As in the previous measurement (klog:37185), the sub-laser was injected into PRY, SRY, and SRX, the PLL was engaged, and the beat signal was observed with the RFPD installed at OMC REFL. The minimum and maximum frequencies at which the beat-signal amplitude reached its maximum were measured. The results are summarized below.
PRY
Minimum Maximum
161.501 MHz 161.583 MHz
138.351 MHz 138.485 MHz (assuming ±67 kHz around 138.418 MHz)
−140.999 MHz −140.865 MHz (assuming ±67 kHz around −140.932 MHz)
−161.783 MHz −161.649 MHz (assuming ±67 kHz around −161.716 MHz)
SRY
Minimum Maximum
161.371 MHz 161.492 MHz
140.6095 MHz 140.7305 MHz (assuming ±60.5 kHz around 140.67 MHz)
−141.0055 MHz −140.8845 MHz (assuming ±60.5 kHz around −140.945 MHz)
−161.7595 MHz −161.6385 MHz (assuming ±60.5 kHz around −161.699 MHz)
SRX
Minimum Maximum
−160.384 MHz −160.244 MHz (assuming ±70 kHz around −160.314 MHz)
−140.65 MHz −140.51 MHz (assuming ±70 kHz around −140.58 MHz)
162.316 MHz 162.456 MHz (assuming ±70 kHz around 162.386 MHz)
140.33 MHz 140.47 MHz (assuming ±70 kHz around 140.400 MHz)
During the measurements, the sub-laser temperature was changed significantly when switching the beat frequency from +160 MHz to −160 MHz. Under these conditions, the beat frequency observed at OMC REFL fluctuated much more frequently, suggesting that the fluctuations become significant until the sub-laser temperature stabilizes. In addition, after switching from +140 MHz to −140 MHz during the SRY measurement, the frequency fluctuations did not subside. However, when the MCE feedback was enabled during the subsequent SRX measurement, the fluctuations were noticeably reduced. This suggests that fluctuations of the main laser also contribute to the beat-frequency instability.
For each cavity, the midpoint between the measured minimum and maximum frequencies was calculated and divided by the corresponding FSR calculated from the design lengths of 64.9265 m (PRY), 64.9264 m (SRY), and 68.2562 m (SRX). The resulting values were rounded to the nearest integers, and the measured frequencies were fitted with the linear function AN+B, where A and B are fitting parameters and N is the corresponding integer. The fitting results are as follows.
PRY (Fig. 1)
A = 2.30892 ± 0.00044 MHz
B = −0.091 ± 0.030 MHz
SRY (Fig. 2)
A = 2.30818 ± 0.00046 MHz
B = −0.136 ± 0.030 MHz
SRX (Fig. 3)
A = 2.19520 ± 0.00051 MHz
B = −0.076 ± 0.035 MHz
Since A corresponds to the FSR, the cavity lengths obtained from the fitted FSR values are
PRY
Fitted length: 64.921 ± 0.012 m
Design length: 64.9265 m
Difference (Fitted − Design): −0.6 ± 1.2 cm
SRY
Fitted length: 64.941 ± 0.013 m
Design length: 64.9264 m
Difference (Fitted − Design): 1.5 ± 1.3 cm
SRX
Fitted length: 68.284 ± 0.016 m
Design length: 68.2562 m
Difference (Fitted − Design): 2.8 ± 1.6 cm
Therefore, the measured PRY length is consistent with the design value within the measurement uncertainty of 1.2 cm. In contrast, the differences between the measured and design values for SRY and SRX exceed their respective uncertainties, suggesting that their actual cavity lengths may differ from the design values.
ETMX went to PAY_TRIPPED at 13:56 JST due to glitches on MN V1 photosensor (Fig.1).
ETMX was in MISALIGNED (STATE_N=1400) and all payload control was disengaged, so it's not caused by the local control.
Similar glitches appeared several times before going to PAY_TRIPPED (Fig.2).
This situation is similar to klog#29475 (ITMX_MN_V1), klog#31522 (ETMY_MN_V1), and klog#32077 (ETMY_MN_V2).
If glitches will appear again, it might be better to stop using ETMX_MN_V1.
Pictures: link
[Saito, Tanaka, Fujimoto]
We performed a PRX length measurement using the beat signal between the main laser and the auxiliary laser in OMC REFL.
As a cross-check of the data analysis, I analyzed the data independently from Saito-kun. In this entry, I show my results.
Please refer to Saito-kun’s klog entry (klog #37185) for the details of the measurement.
From my analysis, the measured PRX length is consistent with the design value within the measurement uncertainty of 1.3 cm, and this is consistent with Saito-kun's result:
Design values for PRX
The design values for PRX are as follows:
Measured beat frequency
We measured the beat frequencies between the main laser and the auxiliary laser when the auxiliary laser was resonant in PRX at four different frequency regions: around -160 MHz, -140 MHz, +140 MHz, and +160 MHz.
For the +140 MHz and +160 MHz cases, we measured the frequency range where the maximum could not be clearly distinguished, and estimated the center values and error bars from that range.
For the -140 MHz and -160 MHz cases, due to time constraints, we did not perform this range measurement. Instead, we used the frequencies that seemed to correspond to the maxima as the measured points. For their error bars, we used the uncertainty obtained from the +140 MHz measurement, which was 0.064 MHz.
The results are summarized in the table below:
| Beat frequency where aux. resonate | FSR index |
| +162.403(40) MHz | 147 |
| +140.430(64) MHz | 137 |
| -140.619(64) MHz | 9 |
| -160.371(64) MHz | 0 |
Fitting results
I plotted the beat frequency as a function of the FSR index and fitted the data with a linear function, a*x+b, where x is the FSR index.
Fig. 1 shows the measured data points and the fitted line.
The fitting model and the obtained parameters are as follows:
Results for the FSR and PRX length
The fitted parameter (a) directly gives the FSR of PRX.
The PRX length calculated from this FSR is as follows:
Therefore, within the measurement uncertainty of 1.3 cm, the measured PRX cavity length is consistent with the design value.
[Tanaka, Fujimoto, Saito]
To observe the beat signal with the RFPD installed at OMC REFL, the vertical axis of the spectrum analyzer was set to a linear scale, and the number of frame averages was increased to make the peak height and frequency easier to identify. During the observation, the beat frequency occasionally shifted toward lower frequencies, sometimes as often as once every few seconds. The No. 3 sub-laser used in this experiment (as identified in the JGW DOC documentation) is known to exhibit frequency-noise events that increase its RMS frequency noise approximately once every 5 s to 2 min, and the occurrence rate closely matched that of the observed beat-frequency shifts. Therefore, these frequency shifts are considered to originate from the frequency noise of the sub-laser. The beat-signal amplitude also fluctuated, which is believed to be caused by fluctuations of PRX. Accordingly, when the beat signal was stable, the LO frequency was varied, and the minimum and maximum frequencies at which the beat-signal amplitude reached its maximum were measured around 160 MHz, 140 MHz, −160 MHz, and −140 MHz. Fitting these measurements yielded a PRX length of 68.27 ± 0.01 m, compared with the design value of 68.2563 m.
Therefore, when the beat signal was stable, the LO frequency was varied, and the minimum and maximum frequencies at which the beat-signal amplitude reached its maximum were measured around 160 MHz, 140 MHz, −160 MHz, and −140 MHz. Negative frequencies correspond to the case where the sub-laser frequency is lower than the main-laser frequency. The measured values are listed below.
Minimum Maximum
162.363 MHz 162.442 MHz
140.366 MHz 140.494 MHz
−140.683 MHz −140.555 MHz (assuming ±0.064 MHz around −140.619 MHz)
−160.435 MHz −160.307 MHz (assuming ±0.064 MHz around −160.371 MHz)
The midpoint between the minimum and maximum frequencies was then calculated for each measurement. Each midpoint was divided by the FSR calculated from the PRX design length of 68.2563 m. The resulting values were rounded to the nearest integers, and the measured frequencies were fitted with the linear function AN+B, where A and B are fitting parameters and N is the corresponding integer. The fitting results are shown in Fig. 3 and are summarized below:
A = 2.1957 ± 0.0004 MHz
B = −0.08 ± 0.03 MHz
Since A corresponds to the FSR, the PRX length calculated from the fitted FSR is
Fitted PRX length: 68.27 ± 0.01 m
Design value: 68.2563 m
With Jinshui Tian, Yuli Liang
We are preparing for the installation of the Ncal system. As part of this preparation, we checked the installation area and confirmed the tools, space, and cable routing needed for the pylon and Ncal installation work.
The following items were checked at the site:
The site photos will be shared later.
[Fujimoto, Kenta, Saito, YamaT]
We laid cables on the AS table to connect Moku to the DGS network.
Only one UTP cable had been laid from the OMC fire alarm rack to the k1ctr6@OMC and laying a new cable from the OMC fire alarm rack requires an aerial work platform and schedule coordination with technical staffs. So I installed a new unmanaged switch in the workstation cart and split the DGS LAN to k1ctr@OMC and Moku@AS-table as shown in attached figures.
This implementation is not suitable for permanent equipment. So it will be removed after finishing recent PRCL/SRCL works. If DGS wired LAN will be permanently required around AS table, make a request in advance so we can coordinate schedules with technical staffs for laying a new cable between the OMC fire alarm rack and the AS table.
I offloaded the BF GAS with the FR.
[Joshua, Tanaka, Disha, Fujimoto, Saito]
To perform the measurement proposed in klog:37169 using the beat signal at the OMC REFL, a new RFPD was installed at OMC REFL. After injecting the sub-laser into PRX and engaging the PLL, the beat signal was successfully observed with the newly installed RFPD. The amplitude and frequency of the beat signal both fluctuated, making it difficult to finely adjust the LO frequency to maximize the beat signal. However, since both the resonance and anti-resonance points were successfully identified, we plan to reduce the effect of these fluctuations by increasing the number of averaging frames on the spectrum analyzer. The beat frequency will then be determined by measuring the minimum and maximum frequencies at which the beat-signal amplitude begins to decrease.
[Tanaka, Fujimoto, Saito]
To observe the beat signal with the RFPD installed at OMC REFL, the vertical axis of the spectrum analyzer was set to a linear scale, and the number of frame averages was increased to make the peak height and frequency easier to identify. During the observation, the beat frequency occasionally shifted toward lower frequencies, sometimes as often as once every few seconds. The No. 3 sub-laser used in this experiment (as identified in the JGW DOC documentation) is known to exhibit frequency-noise events that increase its RMS frequency noise approximately once every 5 s to 2 min, and the occurrence rate closely matched that of the observed beat-frequency shifts. Therefore, these frequency shifts are considered to originate from the frequency noise of the sub-laser. The beat-signal amplitude also fluctuated, which is believed to be caused by fluctuations of PRX. Accordingly, when the beat signal was stable, the LO frequency was varied, and the minimum and maximum frequencies at which the beat-signal amplitude reached its maximum were measured around 160 MHz, 140 MHz, −160 MHz, and −140 MHz. Fitting these measurements yielded a PRX length of 68.27 ± 0.01 m, compared with the design value of 68.2563 m.
Therefore, when the beat signal was stable, the LO frequency was varied, and the minimum and maximum frequencies at which the beat-signal amplitude reached its maximum were measured around 160 MHz, 140 MHz, −160 MHz, and −140 MHz. Negative frequencies correspond to the case where the sub-laser frequency is lower than the main-laser frequency. The measured values are listed below.
Minimum Maximum
162.363 MHz 162.442 MHz
140.366 MHz 140.494 MHz
−140.683 MHz −140.555 MHz (assuming ±0.064 MHz around −140.619 MHz)
−160.435 MHz −160.307 MHz (assuming ±0.064 MHz around −160.371 MHz)
The midpoint between the minimum and maximum frequencies was then calculated for each measurement. Each midpoint was divided by the FSR calculated from the PRX design length of 68.2563 m. The resulting values were rounded to the nearest integers, and the measured frequencies were fitted with the linear function AN+B, where A and B are fitting parameters and N is the corresponding integer. The fitting results are shown in Fig. 3 and are summarized below:
A = 2.1957 ± 0.0004 MHz
B = −0.08 ± 0.03 MHz
Since A corresponds to the FSR, the PRX length calculated from the fitted FSR is
Fitted PRX length: 68.27 ± 0.01 m
Design value: 68.2563 m
[Tanaka, Hirose, Fujimoto, Saito]
Following the same procedure as in the previous measurement (klog:37185), the lengths of PRY, SRY, and SRX were measured. The differences between the measured and design values were 0.6 ± 1.2 cm for PRY, 1.5 ± 1.3 cm for SRY, and 2.8 ± 1.6 cm for SRX. Therefore, the PRY measurement is consistent with the design value within the measurement uncertainty of 1.2 cm, whereas the differences for SRY and SRX exceed their respective uncertainties, suggesting that their actual lengths may differ from the design values.
As in the previous measurement (klog:37185), the sub-laser was injected into PRY, SRY, and SRX, the PLL was engaged, and the beat signal was observed with the RFPD installed at OMC REFL. The minimum and maximum frequencies at which the beat-signal amplitude reached its maximum were measured. The results are summarized below.
PRY
Minimum Maximum
161.501 MHz 161.583 MHz
138.351 MHz 138.485 MHz (assuming ±67 kHz around 138.418 MHz)
−140.999 MHz −140.865 MHz (assuming ±67 kHz around −140.932 MHz)
−161.783 MHz −161.649 MHz (assuming ±67 kHz around −161.716 MHz)
SRY
Minimum Maximum
161.371 MHz 161.492 MHz
140.6095 MHz 140.7305 MHz (assuming ±60.5 kHz around 140.67 MHz)
−141.0055 MHz −140.8845 MHz (assuming ±60.5 kHz around −140.945 MHz)
−161.7595 MHz −161.6385 MHz (assuming ±60.5 kHz around −161.699 MHz)
SRX
Minimum Maximum
−160.384 MHz −160.244 MHz (assuming ±70 kHz around −160.314 MHz)
−140.65 MHz −140.51 MHz (assuming ±70 kHz around −140.58 MHz)
162.316 MHz 162.456 MHz (assuming ±70 kHz around 162.386 MHz)
140.33 MHz 140.47 MHz (assuming ±70 kHz around 140.400 MHz)
During the measurements, the sub-laser temperature was changed significantly when switching the beat frequency from +160 MHz to −160 MHz. Under these conditions, the beat frequency observed at OMC REFL fluctuated much more frequently, suggesting that the fluctuations become significant until the sub-laser temperature stabilizes. In addition, after switching from +140 MHz to −140 MHz during the SRY measurement, the frequency fluctuations did not subside. However, when the MCE feedback was enabled during the subsequent SRX measurement, the fluctuations were noticeably reduced. This suggests that fluctuations of the main laser also contribute to the beat-frequency instability.
For each cavity, the midpoint between the measured minimum and maximum frequencies was calculated and divided by the corresponding FSR calculated from the design lengths of 64.9265 m (PRY), 64.9264 m (SRY), and 68.2562 m (SRX). The resulting values were rounded to the nearest integers, and the measured frequencies were fitted with the linear function AN+B, where A and B are fitting parameters and N is the corresponding integer. The fitting results are as follows.
PRY (Fig. 1)
A = 2.30892 ± 0.00044 MHz
B = −0.091 ± 0.030 MHz
SRY (Fig. 2)
A = 2.30818 ± 0.00046 MHz
B = −0.136 ± 0.030 MHz
SRX (Fig. 3)
A = 2.19520 ± 0.00051 MHz
B = −0.076 ± 0.035 MHz
Since A corresponds to the FSR, the cavity lengths obtained from the fitted FSR values are
PRY
Fitted length: 64.921 ± 0.012 m
Design length: 64.9265 m
Difference (Fitted − Design): −0.6 ± 1.2 cm
SRY
Fitted length: 64.941 ± 0.013 m
Design length: 64.9264 m
Difference (Fitted − Design): 1.5 ± 1.3 cm
SRX
Fitted length: 68.284 ± 0.016 m
Design length: 68.2562 m
Difference (Fitted − Design): 2.8 ± 1.6 cm
Therefore, the measured PRY length is consistent with the design value within the measurement uncertainty of 1.2 cm. In contrast, the differences between the measured and design values for SRY and SRX exceed their respective uncertainties, suggesting that their actual cavity lengths may differ from the design values.
[Aritomi, Ushiba, Tanaka, Saito]
The sub-laser was injected into SRY, and the PLL was engaged while the LO frequency was swept to scan the beat signal. Using the maximum hold function of the Moku:Lab spectrum analyzer, the SRY transmitted power was recorded as a function of frequency. Because the slopes on the two sides of the resonance peak were different, the data were fitted both with and without a linear background offset. The two fitting methods yielded resonance frequencies differing by approximately 47.9 kHz. If this difference is regarded as the fitting uncertainty, it is comparable to the measurement uncertainty reported previously (klog:37191). The PLL UGF was then reduced to narrow the beat-signal linewidth, and the measurement and fitting procedure was repeated. However, the fitted resonance frequencies with and without a linear background offset differed by approximately 143 kHz, indicating that the fitting uncertainty was not improved. To achieve more accurate fitting, it will likely be necessary to suppress fluctuations in the beat-signal amplitude and reduce the influence of higher-order modes.
According to Saito-kun, HV amp (x10) was directly connected to the laser PZT input for the PLL lock. According to my past experiences, the direct connection tends to excite PZT at high frequency.
To solve this problem, we inserted a passive LPF that is set as one of the filters for the control servo between the PZT input and the HV. According to my memory, 10Hz ?? LPF and 100kHz?? LPF were used as one of the control filters. So what I can suggest is to set a passive LPF btw the PZT and the HV, and remove the same LPF in the control filters. I have a ponoma case and a film condenser (400V?) in my room.
Another concern is that the UGF at 10kHz for the PLL control might to excite some resonances of the PZT as in the main laser frequency stabilization servo.
Not "EYC P-55", "IYC P-55" is correct.