HOME SBOX THOMX MINICAV Utilities
SBOX orders SBOX installation SBOX commissioning SBOX control command
  Status of commissioning, report also here plots are reports., Page 13 of 13  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Author Statusdown Type Category Location Title
  219   Thu Apr 25 22:12:25 2024 Xinyi LuFixedinfolasers and opticsOptical room2 mirror cavity high power experiments

Today, Ronic and I recorded some intracavity power and cavity mode size as shown in Fig. 1.

Coupling was calculated using the locking curve of this overcoupled cavity. Pr/Pi = 1-Cgeo*Cimp, Cimp = 1-|1-2T1/RTL|^2

We can see that the effective gain, coupling, and mode size decrease with increasing power. And the beam is constantly moving.

Tomorrow we will try to optimize the telescope for the high-power hot cavity.

 
 

 

 

  220   Mon May 6 18:38:18 2024 Xinyi LuFixedinfolasers and opticsOptical roomhigh-power experiments of 2-mirror cavity

Today, Ronic, Daniele and I redo the high-power 2-mirror cavity experiments, and the results are shown in the table (Figure 1 and Excel 2 ).

- The intracavity power ~500kW can be obtained at 47W injection, but we then have no increase or even a decrease in intracavity power when increasing the injection power, and the coupling is decreasing. It looks like the saturation power of the current device.

- We moved the telescope last week at 2A by moving the concave lens 0.5cm closer to the cavity but almost no change in intracavity power (195kW to 193kW). The telescopes for today's experiment are in the new locations from last week, and we didn't move them today.

- Figure 3 shows the locking curve at 500kW with some thermal effect changes.

- Figure 4 shows the de-lock and to-lock curves at 14kW.

- The current results may be due to two causes, the thermal lensing effect and the physical change in the mirror coating. It is possible that the transmission of the two mirrors changes with temperature.

- The next plan is to adjust the telescope at 4A to see if we can increase the intracavity power. Meanwhile, do some simulations about dynamic locking, coupling rate, and transmittance.

Xinyi Lu wrote:

Today, Ronic and I recorded some intracavity power and cavity mode size as shown in Fig. 1.

Coupling was calculated using the locking curve of this overcoupled cavity. Pr/Pi = 1-Cgeo*Cimp, Cimp = 1-|1-2T1/RTL|^2

We can see that the effective gain, coupling, and mode size decrease with increasing power. And the beam is constantly moving.

Tomorrow we will try to optimize the telescope for the high-power hot cavity.

 

  221   Thu May 16 18:51:17 2024 Xinyi LuFixedinfolasers and opticsOptical roomhigh-power experiments of 2-mirror cavity

here is a Matlab code to try to optimize the telescope for a hot cavity,
taking into account the thermal lens in the coupling mirror.

from that code, one can deduce using the "Gaussian Beam" software (using the attached xml file) an optimized telescope with 100% geometrical coupling @ Pcav = 700kW and absorption in the coatings = 0.6ppm

Xinyi Lu wrote:

Today, Ronic, Daniele and I redo the high-power 2-mirror cavity experiments, and the results are shown in the table (Figure 1 and Excel 2 ).

- The intracavity power ~500kW can be obtained at 47W injection, but we then have no increase or even a decrease in intracavity power when increasing the injection power, and the coupling is decreasing. It looks like the saturation power of the current device.

- We moved the telescope last week at 2A by moving the concave lens 0.5cm closer to the cavity but almost no change in intracavity power (195kW to 193kW). The telescopes for today's experiment are in the new locations from last week, and we didn't move them today.

- Figure 3 shows the locking curve at 500kW with some thermal effect changes.

- Figure 4 shows the de-lock and to-lock curves at 14kW.

- The current results may be due to two causes, the thermal lensing effect and the physical change in the mirror coating. It is possible that the transmission of the two mirrors changes with temperature.

- The next plan is to adjust the telescope at 4A to see if we can increase the intracavity power. Meanwhile, do some simulations about dynamic locking, coupling rate, and transmittance.

Xinyi Lu wrote:

Today, Ronic and I recorded some intracavity power and cavity mode size as shown in Fig. 1.

Coupling was calculated using the locking curve of this overcoupled cavity. Pr/Pi = 1-Cgeo*Cimp, Cimp = 1-|1-2T1/RTL|^2

We can see that the effective gain, coupling, and mode size decrease with increasing power. And the beam is constantly moving.

Tomorrow we will try to optimize the telescope for the high-power hot cavity.

 

 

  222   Fri May 17 15:02:01 2024 Xinyi LuFixedinfolasers and opticsOptical roomhigh-power experiments of 2-mirror cavity

Here's a summary of our experiment last week:

The initial telescope position: 920 mm (f=+250mm) and 1148 mm (f=-150mm) from the amplifier output.

Mon May 6: We moved the concave lens 0.5mm closer to the cavity.

Tue May 7: We moved the D-shaped mirror position at high power, and the intracavity power reached a maximum of 566 kW at 7 A (as Fig 1). The telescopes are the same as on May 6.

Mon May 13: We moved the two lenses closer to the cavity by 12 cm with the two lenses 20 cm apart. At 5A and 6A, we tried several times to move the concave lens slightly to get higher power. CEP and alignment were optimized after each movement. The best power is shown in Fig. 2 and the table.

Tue May 14: We moved the two lenses far from the cavity ((in the middle of May 13 and before). We tried several times to move the concave lens slightly to get higher power. CEP and alignment were optimized after each movement. The best power is shown in Fig. 2 and the table.

We find a small peak in the transmission at high power when the cavity is just locked (as shown in Figure 4-6 at different powers).

Xinyi Lu wrote:

here is a Matlab code to try to optimize the telescope for a hot cavity,
taking into account the thermal lens in the coupling mirror.

from that code, one can deduce using the "Gaussian Beam" software (using the attached xml file) an optimized telescope with 100% geometrical coupling @ Pcav = 700kW and absorption in the coatings = 0.6ppm

Xinyi Lu wrote:

Today, Ronic, Daniele and I redo the high-power 2-mirror cavity experiments, and the results are shown in the table (Figure 1 and Excel 2 ).

- The intracavity power ~500kW can be obtained at 47W injection, but we then have no increase or even a decrease in intracavity power when increasing the injection power, and the coupling is decreasing. It looks like the saturation power of the current device.

- We moved the telescope last week at 2A by moving the concave lens 0.5cm closer to the cavity but almost no change in intracavity power (195kW to 193kW). The telescopes for today's experiment are in the new locations from last week, and we didn't move them today.

- Figure 3 shows the locking curve at 500kW with some thermal effect changes.

- Figure 4 shows the de-lock and to-lock curves at 14kW.

- The current results may be due to two causes, the thermal lensing effect and the physical change in the mirror coating. It is possible that the transmission of the two mirrors changes with temperature.

- The next plan is to adjust the telescope at 4A to see if we can increase the intracavity power. Meanwhile, do some simulations about dynamic locking, coupling rate, and transmittance.

Xinyi Lu wrote:

Today, Ronic and I recorded some intracavity power and cavity mode size as shown in Fig. 1.

Coupling was calculated using the locking curve of this overcoupled cavity. Pr/Pi = 1-Cgeo*Cimp, Cimp = 1-|1-2T1/RTL|^2

We can see that the effective gain, coupling, and mode size decrease with increasing power. And the beam is constantly moving.

Tomorrow we will try to optimize the telescope for the high-power hot cavity.

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

  223   Wed Jun 19 10:38:00 2024 Ronic ChicheFixedinfomechanics | lasers and optics | detectors and electronicsOptical roomD-shape mirrors positionning status

summary:

- the motors used to move the D-shape are the Newport Picomotors 8303-V
the sensitivity is roughly 30nm/step
the range is 1 600 000 steps or 50mm

- the 4 axis controller used ot move these motors is the Newport 8742.
channel 1 is for the vertical D-shape
channel 2 is for the horizontal D-shape
+N steps on the controller, you retract the D-shape mirror from the beam
-N steps on the controller, you push the D-shape mirror to the beam

the 0 position, vertically and horizontally is close to the beam.
the stand position is at ~ +200 000 steps in both directions.

 

Ronic Chiche wrote:

The cavity box is vacuum pumped at 6*10^-2 mbar.

Ronic Chiche wrote:

This afternoon we opened the cavity and put the D-shape mirrors at their correct place, close to the beam.
we checked the relative position of the mirrors to the beam using the 2nd stage of the amplifier (<1W) and with the sensitive (and cleaned) orange optical card.
with this configuration, we can see very clearly the beam inside the cavity (~ 100µW) and we can check easily if the D-shape mirrors are correctly placed.

the motors used to move the D-shape are the Newport Picomotors 8303-V
with roughly 30nm/step sensitivity and 50mm of range (~1 600 000 steps)
the 4 axis controller used ot move these motors is the Newport 8742.

For both Vertical and Horizontal D-shape mirrors:
* when you do +N steps on the controller, you retract the D-shape mirror from the beam
* when you do -N steps on the controller, you push the D-shape mirror to the beam

the 0 position on the controller corresponds to the D-shape close to the beam.

now, the FP cavity is closed and pumped to go back to vacuum.

 

 

 

  226   Fri Nov 29 12:06:05 2024 Alice RenauxFixedinfolasers and opticsOptical roomMenhir 160MHz laser

The Menhir 160MHz has been put back in place on the CELIA amplifier setup. Its output power is measured to be 150-160mW with an attenuator as expected. Its spectrum is available in "spectre_avant_cvbg.xlsx" and "spectre_avant_cvbg.png".

The pulses are stretched by means of a CVBG. Their spectrum is available in "spectre_apres_cvbg.xlsx" and "spectre_apres_cvbg.png".

The laser is coupled into an optical fiber with an output power of 11.5mW for a 32mW input.

 

  228   Tue Dec 3 13:51:52 2024 Ronic ChicheFixedinfoutilitiesOptical roomoptical table cleaning

this morning with Alice and Daniele, we removed all the optics elements and equipments from the SBOX optical table and started to clean it.
the dust meter count 0 on all particle sizes after the cleaning.

we observed a small part of the SBOX which seems to be oxydised (see picture).

the two previously used mirrors of the SBOX (C23018/7 and C23017/2) were already in their plastic boxes outside of the SBOX.
they are still on the optical table.

we have to decide which mirrors to put in the cavity:

if we don't want to use a "new" ThomX coupling mirror M1, we have to use a Gamma-factory mirror (161185) with T=460ppm for example (we don't have any other FS plan mirrors).

if we don't plan to work at high power in the SBOX for the moment, we could use an "old" ThomX M2 mirror with ROC=2.241m (C1611/11) to avoid any risk of contamination of a "new" ThomX M2 mirror.

  229   Fri Dec 6 16:59:57 2024 Ronic ChicheFixedinfoutilitiesOptical roomoptical table cleaning

this afternoon, we checked the dust meter which is at 0 for 1 and 5µm dust particles but ~ 2000-3000 for 0.3µm particles.

we opened the two top panels to let the air flow clean the inside of the vessel.

we observed some other minor oxydised regions (than the one taken in picture) on the external parts of the inox panels but at first sight, nothing inside the vessel.

Ronic Chiche wrote:

this morning with Alice and Daniele, we removed all the optics elements and equipments from the SBOX optical table and started to clean it.
the dust meter count 0 on all particle sizes after the cleaning.

we observed a small part of the SBOX which seems to be oxydised (see picture).

the two previously used mirrors of the SBOX (C23018/7 and C23017/2) were already in their plastic boxes outside of the SBOX.
they are still on the optical table.

we have to decide which mirrors to put in the cavity:

if we don't want to use a "new" ThomX coupling mirror M1, we have to use a Gamma-factory mirror (161185) with T=460ppm for example (we don't have any other FS plan mirrors).

if we don't plan to work at high power in the SBOX for the moment, we could use an "old" ThomX M2 mirror with ROC=2.241m (C1611/11) to avoid any risk of contamination of a "new" ThomX M2 mirror.

 

  231   Tue Mar 4 18:33:26 2025 Ronic ChicheFixedinfoutilitiesOptical roomoptical table cleaning

now, it seems the table is clean enough (dust meter counts 0 particles) to install a 2 mirrors FP-cavity.

Ronic Chiche wrote:

this afternoon, we checked the dust meter which is at 0 for 1 and 5µm dust particles but ~ 2000-3000 for 0.3µm particles.

we opened the two top panels to let the air flow clean the inside of the vessel.

we observed some other minor oxydised regions (than the one taken in picture) on the external parts of the inox panels but at first sight, nothing inside the vessel.

Ronic Chiche wrote:

this morning with Alice and Daniele, we removed all the optics elements and equipments from the SBOX optical table and started to clean it.
the dust meter count 0 on all particle sizes after the cleaning.

we observed a small part of the SBOX which seems to be oxydised (see picture).

the two previously used mirrors of the SBOX (C23018/7 and C23017/2) were already in their plastic boxes outside of the SBOX.
they are still on the optical table.

we have to decide which mirrors to put in the cavity:

if we don't want to use a "new" ThomX coupling mirror M1, we have to use a Gamma-factory mirror (161185) with T=460ppm for example (we don't have any other FS plan mirrors).

if we don't plan to work at high power in the SBOX for the moment, we could use an "old" ThomX M2 mirror with ROC=2.241m (C1611/11) to avoid any risk of contamination of a "new" ThomX M2 mirror.

 

 

  237   Fri Jun 13 20:10:00 2025 Alice RenauxFixedreportlasers and opticsOptical roomDamaged mirrors test

Today with Dorian we tested three mirrors with which we previously haven't been able to obtain any resonance or optical beating :

- C16111/11 : The mirror looks normal under a microscope, apart from a few inclusions and maybe a small scratch towards the edge. We tested it with a 161186 M1 mirror and we weren't able to obtain any optical beating on the cavity's mirrors or resonance.

- 161185 (1) : The mirror looks normal with the naked eye. We tested it with a 161182 M2 mirror and we were able to notice some optical beating on the cavity's mirrors as well as small resonance peaks and a higher-order transverse mode.

- 161185 (2) : The mirror shows some damage on the substrate side (not the coated side). We tested it with a 161186 M2 mirror and we were able to notice some optical beating on the cavity's mirrors as well as huge resonance peaks and a Gaussian transverse mode.

The updated recap file is available here, as well as a few pictures.

  241   Thu Sep 4 17:35:50 2025 Ronic ChicheFixedinfolasers and optics | detectors and electronicsOptical roomInstallation of the avalanche photodiode

After installing the 2nd EOM, we had some trouble to be able to lock again.
One possible reason was the very low signal level in transmission, which is important to trigger the locking system (and stop it).

See the Alice post for details, but we were able to measure only once the Finesse of the cavity at around 2600.

After the Finesse measurement, we opened the box to change the M1 mirror... so the box is at ambient pressure now.

I took back the avalanche photodiode from the Minicav room and installed it on the setup to replace the FPC transmission photodiode.
Now, the transmission peaks are at the 1V level, and it's very easy to trigger on...
The system locked very easily, even without being under vacuum.
It will help if we need to inject very low power laser (e.g. OEwaves after 2x EOM and AOM).

 

ELOG V3.1.4-395e101