MIF (General)shoichi.oshino - 11:26 Friday 13 June 2025 (34184)
Print this reportFinesse measurement Xarm 20250613DATE : 2025/06/13 01:52 UTC ARM : X TEMP ITM : 92.0 TEMP ETM : 46.1 NUM : 10 IFO REFL HWP : 152.0 PSL HWP : 173.0 IMC POWER : 5.4 VALUE : 1371.1 ERROR : 10.4
Measured data is stored to /users/Commissioning/data/Finesse/Xarm/20250613-015257
Images attached to this report
Comments to this report:
takaaki.yokozawa - 11:52 Friday 13 June 2025 (34186)
Print this reportOne suspect point of the lower finesse value from previous measurement (klog34184) is the different of the laser power at the IMC TRANS(IMC POWER).
In previous case, the IMC POWER value was 6.5, but in this case, the IMC POWER value was 5.4 (PSL HWP = 173, same )
Actually, when I checked the signal of last increasing laser power state, PSL HWP=173 corresponds 5.2 W. If we check the similar measurement, we need to set the target PSL HWP = 177 (6.9 W)
Also, not only Xarm, but also Yarm finesse value was small, so if we check more carefully, it would be better to measure the finesse with changing the target PSL_HWP in the script.
Images attached to this comment
tomotada.akutsu - 12:00 Friday 13 June 2025 (34189)
Print this report
Thank you for the finesse measurement, and these results would suggest that we may still need to measure the finesse more frequently for a while.
takaaki.yokozawa - 9:06 Friday 04 July 2025 (34452)
Print this reportThe IMC output power vs PSL HWP rotation was different from previous Finesse measurement. Should we keep sam IMC output power or PSL_HWP value? Fig.1. 13th June Fig.2. Today 4th July