Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Check the location of the stepper motors on IP stage #89

Closed
MiyoKouseki opened this issue Oct 19, 2020 · 12 comments
Closed

Check the location of the stepper motors on IP stage #89

MiyoKouseki opened this issue Oct 19, 2020 · 12 comments
Assignees

Comments

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member Author

MiyoKouseki commented Oct 19, 2020

とりあえずここにまとめた。
https://gwdoc.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/cgi-bin/private/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=12144

@NaohisaSato @NaoatsuHirata このp.6,7,8,9にあるα1,2,3とRのパラメータを確認していただけませんか?
それらの定義はp.5にあります。
これを元にL,T,Yの自由度に変換して実際に制御するので、確認していただきたいです。。

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member Author

@naibafomsare ( @terrencetec ) I tried to generalize your equation according to Fuji-kun's memo. Could you check the equation written in p.5 on JGW-E2012144-v1?

@terrencetec
Copy link

terrencetec commented Oct 23, 2020

The equation on page 5 looks about right to me. But there's a caveat. Let me just put a remark here even if it's not related to stepping motors.

We never used the dimensions from the CAD, except for dimensions that we cannot measurement by tape measure or caliper. This was suggested by Lucia a while back. They measure the LVDT positions and their angles and use onsite measurements to derive the actual sensing matrices that are used in Type-A suspensions. I don't now how they did they but later there was an occasion that proves the accuracy of this method: Nakano-san derived optical lever L2Y coupling using some IFO measurements, and we derived the exact, same value using the IP's displacement. This suggests Lucia's method is superior to those we used, which are based on CAD values. However, in Type-B suspensions, Enzo tried to replicate this method but seemed to have failed, according to recent measurements, which reveals huge coupling between IP DoFs. So, I had to do some ad-hoc diagonalization, whose result will not agree with your equation on page 5.

As for the actuation matrix, and sensing matrix for geophones, we just intercalibrate or diagonalize them to the LVDT sensing matrix. Nevertheless, I am not sure how they fix the scale of the actuation matrix, they're very possibly arbitrary.

@naibafomsare
Copy link

  • The reason the initial estimate of the matrices was wrong was because Mark didn't read the correct value from the 3D-CAD. This was clarified later on.

  • Measuring the position of the LVDTs/FR/Geophones in situ was fine, but it's worth mentioning the method proposed by Lucia was not particularly accurate. We just counted holes in the vacuum chamber and ticks we drew ourselves on pink tape put roughly in place by visual inspection. I checked the 3D-CAD later and the in situ measurements were roughly alright.

  • The matrix calculated by Miyo-kun is the initial estimate, not the final one for LVDTs and geophones. In those cases there has to be an additional process of diagonalization to take into account the asymmetries of the system. The final one and the initial one are not going to be the same.

In general, using the 3D-CAD is fine for fishing rods. For LVDTs and geophones is also fine provided it's just for an initial estimate.

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you.

Equation I wrote is the transformation matrix from local sensors (or actuators) to local axis defined by the location of the vacuum chamber in each suspensions.

Of course, we have to rotate the matrix so that the local axis is aligned.

@terrencetec
Copy link

Thank you.

Equation I wrote is the transformation matrix from local sensors (or actuators) to local axis defined by the location of the vacuum chamber in each suspensions.

Of course, we have to rotate the matrix so that the local axis is aligned.

Just another remark, in general, the final transformation is not a rotation, it can be anything, as long as we can fix the scale of the outputs. For example, each LVDTs might measure a slightly different length scale and that cannot be fixed by a rotation.

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member Author

OK. Of curse.

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member Author

@NaohisaSato
Copy link

@MiyoKouseki 方向Lの定義を教えてください。EYはEND方向と一致しているようですが、他の場所ではどうなりますか?
p.4のLとp.5のLは同じなのですか?
α1~3の起点は?

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member Author

MiyoKouseki commented Oct 27, 2020

p.4 p.5 のLは同じです。角度αの起点はp.5 の-T軸です。

Slack で話したあと、佐藤さんと三代でType-Aのパラメータを確認しました。

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member Author

とりあえず、平田さんが修正した図面をみて、角度を確認しようとおもう。
https://gwdoc.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/cgi-bin/private/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=7077

@MiyoKouseki
Copy link
Member Author

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants