Transfer Cavity / Stabilized HeNe based Laser

Frequency Stabilization
S. Charles Doret
January 10, 2011

1 Introduction
External cavity grating stabilized diode lasers are ideally suited for a wide variety of
physics applications due to their low cost, large mode-hop-free tuning ranges of many
GHz, and narrow sub-MHz linewidths. However, long term frequency drift (generally
measured in hundreds of MHz/hour) makes frequency stabilization to a fixed reference
a prerequisite for application to ion-trapping. Photoionization and laser cooling requires
stability at a level comparable to the natural linewidth of the transitions being addressed
(approximately 5-20 MHz for the strong E1 transitions generally used). Fluorescence
detection and Doppler recooling measurements have the more stringent requirement that
drift be kept to much less than a natural linewidth so as to maintain constant photon
scattering rates.
This is a well studied problem, and a wide assortment of laser stabilization techniques
have been developed, including saturated absorption spectroscopy [1], Faraday polarime-
try [2], locking to ultra-stable optical cavities [3], etc. However, none of these methods
are particularly well suited to ion trapping due to the relative difficulty in preparing an
atomic reference with adequate signal to noise (such as the vapor cells often used for
work with the alkalis) and the fact that a large number of lasers at disparate wavelengths
are required. Fortunately, more general alternative exists, in which a Fabry-Perot etalon
is used to compare the relative frequency drift between two (or more) lasers following a
technique pioneered by Lindsay et al [4] and expanded by Zhao et al [5].

2 Theory
The general premise is as follows: a stable reference laser (either a commercial stabilized
HeNe or an auxilliary laser locked to an atomic reference by other means) and the un-
stable laser(s) are co-aligned into an etalon that has mirrors reflective at all wavelengths.
Monitoring the transmission of light through the cavity while scanning its length with
a piezo allows for comparison of the relative positions of their transmission maxima as

1
 piezos
∆L

to
detector

Figure 1: A half-symmetric Fabry-Perot Etalon.

measured versus piezo drive voltage, and locking these relative positions via feedback to
the unstable lasers maps the stability of the reference laser onto the slave lasers.
To understand how this works, consider the transmission through a two-mirror Fabry-
Perot etalon (see figure 1). Aligning a laser onto the cavity axis allows light to leak
through the first mirror into the cavity, where it is reflected back and forth between the
two cavity mirrors. Generally speaking the light from consecutive reflections is out of
phase, keeping the intra-cavity intensity low. However, should the mirror spacing allows
an integer number of half-wavelengths to precisely fit between the cavity mirrors consec-
utive reflections constructively interfere, increasing the intensity in the cavity to the point
that there is signifcant light leakage through the second mirror and allowing the cavity
transmission to be collected on a photodetector.
Suppose, then, that we assemble a cavity of length L, and work with a laser of wave-
length λ. The condition for constructive interference is

2L/λ = n, (1)

where n is an integer. Consecutive interference maxima must correspond to ∆n = ±1,

meaning that if we scan the length of the cavity we expect a new maximum spaced by

∆L = λ/2, (2)

assuming that λ is fixed. Conversely, if we assume a fixed cavity length L, consecutive

interference maxima correspond to a change in the laser frequency given by

∆f = f 0 − f (3)
= c(1/λ0 − 1/λ) (4)
µ ¶
n+1 n
=c − (5)
2L 2L
= c/2L. (6)

This quantity ∆f is known as the free spectral range of the cavity, or FSR, and is inde-
pendent of laser wavelength; while the change in mirror position ∆L corresponding to

2
 HeNe (633 nm) 866 nm + 200 MHz
866 nm 866 nm + 400 MHz

na+2 na na-2
nb+1 nb nb-1

0.4 0 -0.4
Mirror position (µm)

Figure 2: Simulated fringe shifts in the transmission pattern of a Fabry-Perot etalon. In

this the blue curve corresponds to a set of fringes from a HeNe laser, while other curves
correspond to a laser with small detunings relative to 866 nm. The shift of the 866 nm
laser fringes is clear relative to the fixed HeNe background; note also the essentially
constant spacing of the 866 nm fringes despite the changing cavity length. Labels na and
nb as per the text.

consecutive maxima is wavelength-dependent, the frequency separation depends on only

the cavity geometry.
Now, imagine that we co-align two lasers into the cavity, and that the two lasers have
two different wavelengths denoted by λA and λB . If we scan the length of the cavity,
we expect two regular series of transmission peaks, each with maxima corresponding to
locations where the corresponding laser experiences constructive interference. However,
because λA 6= λB , the positions and spacings of these maxima are different for the two
lasers. Consider the case where one of these lasers, say laser A, is frequency stabilized,
while laser B is free to drift. The stability of laser A allows its transmission maxima
to serve as a length references for the etalon, like a ruler graduated in units of length
λA /21 . Suppose we pick a fringe of our stable laser – marking off a length nA λA of the
etalon – such that there is a particular fringe nB of the drifting laser located nearby. If λB
changes, the etalon length corresponding to its transmission peak will shift from nB λB
to nB (λB + ∆λ), which we will perceive as a shift relative to the selected fringe of the
stable reference laser (figure 2. As such, we can use changes in this relative spacing as an
error signal with which to feed back to laser B, stabilizing its wavelength.
In addition to frequency stabilzation, we can also use the relative positions of the
fringes for lasers A and B to implement controlled scanning of laser B simply by chang-
1
where the scanning cavity allows us only to see a small subset of the markings nA , nA + 1, nA + 2, . . .

3
ing the target fringe separation between the two lasers. Recall that the consecutive fringes
are separated by a constant offset in frequency given by the cavity FSR. This sets a scaling
between fringe position and relative frequency according to
∆Lf ringe
δfB = × F SR (7)
∆LF SR
where ∆Lf ringe and ∆LF SR are the distance that the fringes shift due to drifting of the
laser frequency and the spacing between consecutive fringes, respectively, and FSR is
the free spectral range of the cavity. Applying this scaling to changes in the target fringe
separation maps fringe position onto relative laser frequency, which we can use for tuning
the laser thru frequency ranges comparable to a free spectral range.

3 Implementation
For trapping Ca+ , stable lasers are required at 397 nm (fluorescence and cooling), 423
nm (photoionization), and 854/866 nm (repump)2 .

3.1 Optics Layout

The optics layout has three principle parts:

• filters and dichroics for combining lasers

• the etalon itself

• filters and dichroics for separating lasers and photodetectors for collecting the cav-
ity transmission

A schematic of the complete layout is detailed in figure 3. Most parts are self explanatory,
but what follows is a brief description of component choices.

3.1.1 Stabilized HeNe laser

Our stablized HeNe is from Research Electro Optics, model 32732. It produces ∼ 800µW
in frequency stablized mode, and is quoted to have a maximum frequency drift of 1
MHz/hr, 3 MHz/8 hr, and 10 MHz when power cycled. Our observations based on com-
paring the locked 397 nm laser to the Ca+ resonance suggest that the 10 MHz value is
probably an overestimate; however, as the HeNe laser lifetime is measured in the tens of
thousands of hours, we simply leave the laser powered on. Similar performance is avail-
able from stablized HeNe lasers from other manufacturers, including CVI-Melles Griot;
2
A narrow, ultra-stable laser at 729 nm is also required for sideband cooling and qubit operations, but as
this requires large-bandwidth feedback the stabilization method described here is not applicable, and this
laser is locked to an ultrastable high finesse cavity.

4
 HeNe
397

IO-2D-633-VLP

DMLP567

FF01-395/11-25
LA1131-A
PBS102
BBD1-E02
FEL0850

BBD1-E02

DMLP567

BB1-E02P

CM254-075-E02P

LA1708-A
LA1131-B

FEL0850

866 PBS102
854

Figure 3: The optics layout for coupling light into and out of the transfer cavity. Unla-
beled mirrors are Thorlabs BB1-E02 dielectric mirrors; see table 1 for description of part
numbers.

5
used lasers are also often available on Ebay at steep discounts from the ∼$4,000 price of
a new laser. It is worth nothing that an optical isolator is absolutely essential for using a
stabilized HeNe along with an etalon, as frequency stablized operation is extremely sen-
sitive to optical feedback. The inexpensive single-stage 633 nm isolator available from
Thorlabs is adequate to prevent problems.

3.1.2 Beam Combining/Separation Optics

We combine the lasers sequentially by wavelength, allowing for the use of stock dicrhoic
mirrors and/or edge filters. This begins with the use of a Thorlabs DMLP567 (long wave
pass, 50% reflection at 567 nm) to combine the 397 nm diode laser with the 633 nm
HeNe. These are in turn reflected at nearly normal incidence off of an FEL0850 filter,
which transmits the IR repump lasers. Due to the close proximity of the 854 nm and 866
nm laser lines we combine these using polarization optics ahead of the FEL0850. Beam
separation uses the same optics in reverse order, sequentially separating off 397 nm, 633
nm, and the two IR lasers. Laser power before the cavity is on the order of a few hundred
µW. Depending on relative laser powers it may also be necessary to use a narrow-band
filter in front of the photodiodesto clean up leakage from other wavelengths. For example,
we use a Semrock FF01-395/11-25 filter in front of the 397 nm photodetector to remove
633 nm light reflected by the DMLP567 mirror.
Unfortunately, because we utilize a frequency doubled source for generating our 423
nm 1st step photoionization laser, adding the 846 nm fundamental to this system is chal-
lenging. This could be most easily done by using a color filter to combine 846 nm and 866
nm with matched polarizations prior to combining both with 854 nm using a polarizing
beam splitter. However, our 846/423 nm laser source is generally sufficiently stable for
use in photoionization (which takes place only occasionally when the ion trap needs to be
re-loaded), and thus monitoring and tuning by hand when needed is usually adequate.

3.1.3 FP Etalon
Our etalon is a half-symmetric setup. The curved mirror is a custom-coated Thorlabs
CM254-075-E02P spherical mirror, formed by coating a backside polished CM254-075
mirror blank with the stock E02 coating. The flat mirror is a DMLP900 dichroic. The
E02 coated mirror gives reflectivity exceeding 99% throughout the range from 390 nm to
930 nm. These two mirrors combine to give a finesse of approximately 100 and a FSR of
2 GHz, which are nicely suited as a compromise between ease of alignment, wide cavity-
mediated frequency tuning range, and tight locking performance. Note that the DMLP900
is not being used as designed (normal incidence rather than 45 degrees), but it seems to
provide a reflectivity in the 95% range for all of our wavelengths, much like the specified
values for 45 degree AOI3 . A better etalon (finesse of approximately 400) could be made
by combining our custom EO2 coated mirror with a stock BB1-EO2P backside polished
3
However, we have noticed problems at 397 nm when the mirror is slightly dirty, with lower reflectivity
leading to reduced cavity finesse and poor locking performance.

6
mirror, but the two high reflectivity mirrors make initial alignment challenging due to the
minimal transmission when the cavity is not aligned. As such, we use the DMLP900 to
form a lower finesse cavity to simplify alignment.
The mirrors are mounted in lens tubes to threaded Thorlabs KC1-T cage mounts.
Using lens tubes allows for reproducible removal/replacment of the mirrors during align-
ment as compared to a standard nylon-tipped screw mount. The cage mounts are affixed
to fused silica rods from Technical Glass Products4 using plastic screws. Fused silica has
a low coefficient of thermal expansion of approximately ∆L/L ≈ 1 × 10−6 ; combined
with a plastic enclosure for passive temperature stabilization of the cavity these are ade-
quate to make it highly unlikely that we drift more than one fringe off of our target HeNe
fringes from day-to-day. This makes it easy to find the same fringe (i.e. nHe = constant;
see section 2) each day, allowing us to use the same frequency lock points every day
without recalibration vs. a wavemeter or the atomic transitions. In contrast, stock SS rods
made day-to-day startup more complicated, and on days when the laboratory temperature
was particularly erratic could lead to cavity drifts too large to compensate with the piezo.
At present we are operating with an inexpensive Thorlabs AE0203D04F piezo actua-
tor glued to a single axis of a standard cage mount, driven by one channel of a Thorlabs
MDT693A piezo controller; a function generator provides the oscillating voltage sent
to the controller. Although this slightly misaligns the cavity while scanning the cavity
length, the change in angle is sufficiently minute that it does not affect performance and
thus driving all three knobs is not required.

3.2 Data Collection and Error Signal Generation

Data is collected from a set of four New Focus 2001-FS photoreceivers. These are 200
kHz photodiodes that are battery operated, very low noise, and have onboard gain well
suited to the light levels we use. We tend to scan the cavity over approximately one FSR at
a rate of 60 Hz so as to minimize effects from AC line noise. With a cavity finesse of 100
this gives us a temporal peak width of roughly 100 µsec, so 100-200 kHz is the minimum
detector speed to give an adequate number of points on each transmission fringe for high
quality fitting of the peak center. With the laser powers we use and the detectors at or near
their maximum gain this gives peak signals between .5 and 4 Volts and a signal to noise
exceeding 50. A less expensive option would be a simple Thorlabs photodiode, but it is
likely that an additional pre-amp would be needed to give large enough signals without
making the detector response too slow.
As described above, we collect data from each laser on a separate photodiode. In
principle it is feasible to collect all of the transmission data on a single photodiode, which
would simplify the back-side optics setup, reduce the photodiode expenses, and minimize
the required performance of the data acquisition system. However, these benefits come at
the expense of more complicated data analysis, whereby assumptions must be made as to
which peak corresponds to which laser. Although this will not provide a problem if lasers
4
6 mm size; required size is actually slightly under 6 mm, so only about 50% of rods will work.

7
are tuned to the right frequency before locking, this makes the setup more susceptible to
errors should one of the lasers mode-hop. It also requires more careful selection of the
particular fringe set chosen for operation, since each fringe must be well resolved from
those of neighboring lasers to allow for clean fitting of the peak center.
In our setup the data acquisition is accomplished with a National Instruments PCI-
6143 16 bit simultaneous sample card capable of 250 kS/s on up to 8 channels. We
actually collect data from five sources - the AC voltage sent to the piezo (which maps onto
the piezo position) and the transmission data for each laser. Each transmission spectrum is
fit for a peak center, and a comparison made between the position (measured against piezo
voltage) of each peak relative to the HeNe peaks5 . The measured spacing is compared to
a target spacing as the error signal in a digital PID loop to form a correction signal.
All of our programming is executed in the IGOR Pro software suite. This offers a
variety of packaged fitting functions and graphing capabilities, and is quite up to the task
of fitting our data for the four lasers we fit. Indeed, our feedback rate is limited not by the
fitting (a few msec per trace) but rather the data transfer rate from the DAQ card (9 msec
per trace). Our data collection is triggered so as to collect only “upscans” of the piezo
voltage, and triggering/data transfer delays cause us only to collect half of the upscans.
As such data transfer and fitting can take up as much as 75% of the duty cycle without a
problem. This would allows for piezo scan rates up to at least 100 Hz and feedback rates
of 50 Hz; feedback faster than this would require faster data acquisition or transitioning
to an analog peak detection circuit and an analog PID loop.

3.3 Feedback
After forming an error signal by analyzing relative peak separations we feed back to the
lasers using a National Instruments PCI-6703 16 bit “static update” card, which is a slow
analog output card. Real update rates are at approximately 500 Hz, vastly exceeding the
data collection rate, so for our purposes we can consider them instantaneous. Far faster
cards such as the 6733 are available, but are not required.
Feedback is sent both to the diode lasers and to the etalon. Corrections for the lasers
are sent directly out of the analog out card to the laser piezos, tuning as needed to stabilize
the laser frequency it. Etalon corrections are sent to the mirror piezo to maintain the loca-
tion of the HeNe fringes at the same value of the applied AC voltage. This preserves the
DC length of the cavity, ensuring that we remain on the same set of transmission fringes
even as the laboratory environment changes. These corrections must be superimposed
on top of the AC voltage scan, which is achieved via a simple analog addition circuit as
shown in figure 4. This circuit also allows for the application of a variable DC offset
which can be used to tune the DC cavity length to find the correct set of fringes when
starting things up on a daily basis.
5
We actually fit a pair of HeNe peaks and compare diode laser peak positions vs. the HeNe as a ratio
of the diode peak position relative to the two HeNe peaks. The slightly simpler comparision of the spacing
between diode and HeNe peaks works reasonably well, but locking to a ratio is more immune to piezo

8
 LM150

Vcc Vin Vout Vout

Adj 1.25 - 7 V

220

.1 µF 1 µF

1k

10k

10k 10k
DC bias
adj
10k
AC
in - 10k

PID
10k OP07 -
+ output to
feedback OP07
piezo
+

Figure 4: The analog adding circuit for sending voltages to the piezo driver. The LM150
regulator provides an adjustable, stable bias which can be used to adjust the DC length
of the etalon, which is added to the AC oscillation and near-DC corrections from the
computer PID loop.

9
 20
etalon stability
397 nm
866 nm
10
freq. error (MHz)

-10

-20
0 10 20 30 40 50
t (sec)

Figure 5: Residual frequency error of the locked lasers. The red line buried under the
crosses shows the residual error of the etalon relative to the HeNe laser (1.03 MHz RMS).
The green and black crosses show errors for the 397 nm (2.55 MHz RMS) and 866 nm
(1.17 MHz RMS) lasers, respectively.

3.4 Stabilization Results

As mentioned in the introduction, well adjusted diode lasers tend to drift at a rate of a few
hundred MHz/hour depending on the climate control of the laboratory environment, ther-
mal and mechanical isolation of the laser, etc., with a short term “jitter” of a few MHz on
a sub-second timescale. Although this locking setup does little to reduce the “jitter” (i.e.
linewidth narrowing, for which feedback rates in the kHz regime or faster are required),
based on our calculated error signals we maintain an RMS frequency error of a few MHz,
as shown in figure 5.
In principle the performance of the lock as measured in frequency units should be
inversely proportional to wavelength. This is not shown in the data, however; while the
866 nm laser frequency error is dominated by the instabilities of the etalon itself, the 397
nm laser is considerably noisier. In all likelyhood this is related to the fact that the free-
running stability of the 397 nm laser is also considerably worse than that of the 866 nm
laser (for reasons unknown). We can also monitor the long term stability by comparing
the locked diode lasers to the ion transition, and have observed long term stability at or
below the 5 MHz level, in agreement with the specifications of the stabilized HeNe.
nonlinearities and mechanical vibrations.

10
4 Setup Suggestions and Proposed Improvements
4.1 Optics Alignment
When aligning the lasers into the cavity for the first time, one’s best bet is to start with the
HeNe laser. Its negligible frequency drift and superb mode quality will make the process
more straightforward. As a starting point, align the beam level with the table at the height
of the center of the etalon and directly above a line of table holes, and position backside
optics and detector so that the beam strikes the detector cleanly. Add the mode matching
lens such that the focus lies in free space on the table being careful not to steer the beam
off of the detector.
Once this is done, cease adjusting the laser beam position, which would disturb the
alignment onto the photodetector. Drop the cavity assembly into position with only the
backside (flat) mirror in position, and locate it so that the beam lies on the central axis of
the assembly with the mode matching focus located at the rear mirror. Align the mirror
so as to overlap the retroreflection with the incoming beam, insert the front mirror with
the cavity length matched as closely as possible to the mirror radius of curvature, and
overlap the retroreflection for this mirror as well. At this point things should be well
enough aligned to see some sort of fringes on the photodetector. Start scanning the cavity
piezo so as to move the mirror over a few free spectral ranges, and use the voltage sent to
the piezo driver to trigger an oscilloscope monitoring the photodiode output. Walking the
cavity mirrors in tandem should lead to optimization of the cavity alignment6 .
After optimizing the alignment, consider adjusting the cavity length by co-adjusting
all three knobs on the cage mounts holding the cavity mirrors. There are three easy
ways to determine whether the cavity is too long or too short. First, one can look at the
sidemode structure; the higher order modes are on opposite sides of the dominant mode
depending on whether the cavity is too long or too short – see [6] for details. Second,
one can measure the free spectral range, compare it to the expected value, and adjust the
cavity length accordingly. Third, trial and error works fine; pick a direction and start
translating. If the adjustments are in the correct direction, for a half-symmetric cavity the
side modes should start to collapse onto the dominant mode. Regardless of how one goes
about it, final adjustments should be made by examining the width of the dominant mode
with the goal of making it as narrow as possible.
After aligning the cavity to the HeNe, it should be straightforward to add the other
lasers by co-aligning them with the established HeNe beam path. The HeNe beam should
be visible behind the cavity once things are well aligned so long as the room lights are
off, allowing it to be used to position photodetectors for the other lasers (by removing the
FEL0850 filter). Once everything is well adjusted add an iris to the shared input path,
which can help to remove higher order cavity modes. Also, check the fine alignment of
6
Final fine tuning of the HeNe alignment may be aided by returning to the mirrors which translate the
laser beam itself. Whereas adjusting the cavity mirrors causes translation of the peaks on the oscilloscope,
adjusting the beam position only adjusts their height and relative intensities, making it easier to see small
differences.

11
the beams onto the photodetectors with the backside optics; misalignment can increase
the relative height of the higher order modes.

4.2 Electronics Considerations

The ultimate stability of this method of laser locking is highly sensitive to systematic
noise on the ramp signal applied to the mirror piezo, such as AC line noise. Even if
one scans the cavity at 60 Hz small discrepancies between the scan rate and the AC line
frequency can cause “walking” non-linearities in the applied ramp which are manifested
as systematic shifts of the actual vs. nominal laser frequencies. Unfortunately, the 60
Hz rejection of most commercial piezo controllers is inadequate, so it is important to be
observant of possible ground loops and to check the time dependence of the actual voltage
ramps applied to the piezo. To help resolve this issue, it is recommended that a very clean
power supply be used for the addition circuit detailed in figure 4.
In principle one could also collect the AC component of the voltages actually applied
to the piezo for the data analysis rather than using the low voltages out of the function
generator as a proxy. This would reduce or eliminate the repurcussions of 60 Hz pickup
in the piezo controller. However, dividing down the voltages and deconvolving the AC
component from DC bias and the near-DC cavity length stabilization updates without
introducing distortions and/or additional noise may prove complicated. A better option
might be to simply build a well isolated controller, or to acquire a clean commercial
controller such as the SC100 made by Toptica.

5 Cost Analysis
See following table.

References
[1] K. B. MacAdam, A. Steinbach, and C. Wieman. A narrow-band tunable diode laser
system with grating feedback and a saturated absorption spectrometer for Cs and Rb.
Am J. Phys., 60:1098–1111, 1992.

[2] J A Kerckhoff et al. A frequency stabilization method for diode lasers utilizing low-
field faraday polarimetry. Rev. Sci, 76:093106, 2005.

[3] A. D. Ludlow et al. Compact, thermal-noise-limited optical cavity for diode laser
stabilization at 1 × 10−15 . Opt. Lett., 32:641–643, 2007.

[4] B. G. Lindsay, K. A. Smith, and F. B. Dunning. Control of long-term output frequency

drift in commercial dye lasers. Rev. Sci. I, 62:1656–1657, 1991.

12
[5] W. Z. Zhao et al. A computer-based digital feedback control of frequency drift of
multiple lasers. Rev. Sci. Inst., 69:3737–3740, 1998.

[6] A. E. Siegman. Lasers. University Science Books, 1986.

13
Table 1: Cost Analysis as built. Used prices (where listed) are based on a cursory
survey of Ebay; availability and $$ vary. Key: REO=Research Electro Optics, ν=New
Focus (now part of Newport), S=Semrock, Th=Thorlabs, TGP=Technical Glass Products,
NI=National Instruments.

Source Item Part # Qty List Price Used Price

optics:
REO HeNe 37342 1 $4,038 $1,000
S filter FF01-395/11-25 1 $275
Th isolator IO-2D-633-VLP 1 $625
Th filter FEL0850 2 $72
Th dichroic DMLP567 2 $165
Th cavity mirror CM254-075-E02P 1 $250
Th cavity mirror DMLP900 1 $195
Th mirror BB1-E02 5 $75
Th d-mirror BBD1-E02 2 $85
Th 200 mm lens LA1708-A 1 $27
Th 50 mm lens LA1131-A 1 $ 29
Th 50 mm lens LA1131-A 1 $ 29
Th NIR PBS PBS102 2 $171
Th prism mount KM100P 2 $59
Th clamping arm PM1 2 $10
Th cage mount KC1-T 2 $89
Th piezo actuator AE0203D04F 1 $73
Th lens mount LMR1 3 $16
Th lens tube SM1L10 3 $14
Th iris ID15 1 $42
Th cage plate CP08 1 $17
Th pedestal RS1.5P8e 1 $23
Th post holder PH1.5 16 $7
Th post TR1.5 16 $5
Th base BE1 16 $9
Th fork CF125 17 $8
ν mirror mount 9807 11 $97 $50
TGP glass rod 6 1 $10
electronics:
Th pzt controller MTD693A .33 $1580 $650
fn generator $1100 $10
ν detector 2001-FS 4 $860 $450
NI analog input PCI-6143 1 $1199
NI analog output PCI-6703 1 $1099 $500
totals: $16,300 $11,476

14