I was working on shaking the HAM3 ISI to see the effect of potential clipping on the PR2 scraper baffle (with the idea that we were then going to move the spot on PR2 and see how DARM changed), but I was saturating the H3 actuator and the ISI's watchdog timed out and tripped off.
I had just increased the excitation by a factor of 2, to 10 counts going to H1:ISI-HAM3_ISO_Y_EXC, and that last factor of 2 is what started saturating the actuator. Since we were able to see some subtle effects in DARM with 5 counts, we'll try using that when we next get locked. We may be interested in a conversation with SEI folks about whether it is safe to override the actuator saturation watchdog during this type of test, in order to more clearly see the effect in DARM, but we'll save that for another day.
Sheila pointed out that it would be useful if verbal alarms would tell us when we are saturating a seismic actuator (similar to how it tells us if we are saturating a suspension).
Attached are screenshots of the amount of motion above ambient, as well as that this last factor of 2 increase in actuation is what caused the saturation monitor to start accumulating, as well as of the excitation settings. This DTT template is a copy of what was in the Noise Budget git space for HAM5, with the exception that the noise budget excitation value is 0.6 counts, and I wasn't really seeing an effect in DARM until I got to 5 counts.
Here's also the HAM3 watchdog plot, again showing that it was my actuation that caused the trip.
There is also the suspoint drive infrastructure that we've added to all of the ISI models, allowing you to drive the euler basis motion for a particular suspensions top stage suspension point. Not sure if that will help for this measurement or not. For each ISI there are filter modules called ISI-CHAMBER_SUSPOINT_DRIVE_L/T/V/R/P/Y, giving the necessary testpoints, EXC channels for those fms are stored in the daq at 2048. You will need to populate the downstream eul2cart epics matrix to get the correct translation to the ISI cartesian drives. Output from the eul2cart matrix is then summed into the error point of the cart basis isolation loops. The matl code for writing the coefficients is really simple, for PR2, on HAM3 it would be:
addpath /ligo/svncommon/SeiSVN/seismic/Common/MatlabTools/
cd /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isc/common/projections
load('ISI2SUS_projection_file.mat')
sus={'pr2'}
for ii =1:length(sus)
fill_matrix_values(['H1:ISI-', upper(ISI2SUSprojections.h1.(sus{ii}).chamber), '_SUSPOINT_EUL2CART'],ISI2SUSprojections.h1.(sus{ii}).EUL2CART)
pause(.1)
end
This might fail on a couple of the coefficients, so it might be a good idea to run a couple times. Also, there's only 1 6-dof matrix per ISI, so if drives on multiple suspensions are needed on one table, you will need to populate the matrix for each suspension. Probably also best to zero out all of the matrix elements first, then write with the above code.
TITLE: 05/15 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 9mph Gusts, 6mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.10 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
Walked in to h1 locking PRMI (there was a lockloss 25min earlier (at 1405utc).
I believe Commissioning is in the morning today (along with a calibration measurement), but H1 will be thermalizing the next few hours.
Green arm x power is looking back to normal-ish with power closer to 1.0.
(Also there was box with a bat in it outside the entry to the Control Room.)
TITLE: 05/15 Eve Shift: 2300-0800 UTC (1600-0100 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY: One lock loss with an easy relock. On the first lock I had to step out of Observing to do a sqz scan, this helped our range. Currently locked for 2.5 hours.
LOG:
Seemed very sudden, there was only a very minor wiggle in DARM msec before the lockloss.
Observing 0528 UTC.
I had no issues with ALSX power, it got up near 1 almost immediately. ALSY needed ETMY to be adjusted by 0.1urads for it to catch even though it had flashes near one...annoying. Other than that it was all auto.
RickS, FranciscoL
On Tuesday, May 14, we moved the pcal inner beam by 5 mm on the Rx sensor at X-End. This is the start of an investigation on potential sources of systematic variations to the pcal system.
Our procedure and notes are the following:
We expect this procedure to reflect the calculations done in T2400032 which depend on the position of the IFO beam and the pcal beams on the ETM. With this movement, and following the parameters from the technical note, we are expecting to see a change in the XY ratio of +19 HOPs (after - before). This procedure will be iterating in the following weeks, making a series of movements of the inner beam, with reports on the value obtained after making a beam movement.
0313-0321 UTC
Our range was around 135Mpc after the squeezer relocked itself at 0151UTC, and the SQZ FOM didn't look great. I stepped out of Observing to run SCAN_ALIGNMENT_FDS and SCAN_SQZANG before returning to Observing. We are currently at ~151Mpc, so it seemed well worth the 8 minutes.
FAMIS28353
ITMs look consistent in April, but ETMY looks to have changed since the April 30th measurement. I'd guess that this is due to Robert and Anamaria's changes to the ESD bias on May 5&7th (alog77633).
TITLE: 05/14 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Calibration
INCOMING OPERATOR: TJ
SHIFT SUMMARY:
A light Mainteance day made for a nice & fairly quick return to observing (but our low range of 150Mpc continues---Sheila has a new tool to check on low range in this wiki LINK).
X-arm for ALS had low powers (0.65) after an alignment (which is low), but we made all the way back to NLN. (this was observed last night by Oli & Ibrahim, btw)
LOG:
After Maintenance Day today, I did my first LVEA Sweep of O4 (at about 1140PDT). There were a few items which came up as I swept:
"Confirm no mechanical shorts onto HEPI."
"Cranes in their "parking spots"
"Unplug unused power supplies/extension cords"
At any rate, these were items noticed during my LVEA sweep. I did not change ANYTHING (above) mainly because I had not done a sweep in ages, and perhaps these are things we are "OK" with. At any rate, just wanted to share observations from an old operator. :)
TITLE: 05/14 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 150Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 10mph Gusts, 6mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.11 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Locked for 3 hours, low ALSX arm power for the last day has caused some locking issues. I'll be on the lookout for this.
Addressed TCS Chillers (Tues [May14] 1340-1350pm local) & CLOSED FAMIS #27789:
With a fairly light and non-invasive Maintenance Day, able to turn on Sensor Correction, begin LVEA sweep, and run an alignment at around 1830utc (1130pdt). For the alignment, X-arm was stuck in Increase Flashes a bit so Jenne manually addressed this; ALSx green power was a still a bit low max-ing out at 0.65 (similar to what Oli noted during the windstorm last night). But other than that, the rest of alignment was fully automated. And H1 made it to NLN fully-automated with no issues. Range (in the first few minutes is hovering just under 150Mpc as we join L1 & V1 in OBSERVING.
This morning I took the OPLEV charge measurements on both ETMX and ETMY suspensions. I will post the results below after processing the data.
Both the suspensions were restored to their nominal state after the measurements were complete.
Karmeng, Terry
First figure shows the cavity "mode" when it was first assemble. Single pass power measurement shows 5% loss in the crystal (without mirrors). Based on the cavity parameter, the 500% increase in cavity linewidth is caused by 40% loss in the cavity.
We then tried to assemble a cavity without a crystal while using a mirror mount (the reduced cavity length from the removal of crystal is compensated by increasing the separation between both mirrors). The cavity forms good modes.
A new crystal from box labeled "4" was used on a new block, able to form a cavity with the new crystal.
Next step: make a cavity with mirror 2 (back mirror) on the block.
[Jenne, Sheila]
We did a quick check of how much SR2 needs to move in order to reduce the amount of power on AS_C_NSUM by 50%, in hopes that this will help us and Alena check the calibration of the SR2 sliders, for use in Alena's model.
I left the PSL power at 2W. Both ETMs are in use, but the yarm is misaligned enough that it was fine to use ITMY as my single-bounce optic without getting IR flashes. So, I misaligned ITMX and indeed see no IR arm flashes that would confuse my measurement.
I by-hand moved SR2 to center on AS_C so that I had a known starting place (the rest of the IFO hasn't been aligned in the last few hours, and seismic sensor correction is off for maintenance day, which is probably why I needed to move a very small amount to get AS_C centered).
I then moved SR2 up in pitch until the AS_C_NSUM was reduced by 50%, from 0.0045 to 0.00225 (the y-axis cursors on the _NSUM plot attached). I went back to center, repeated for the opposite direction in pitch, then again back to center and checked the two yaw directions.
With these slider and OSEM values, along with Alena's model and Minhyo's finding that the AS_C QPD is 3mm wide, we should be able to check the slider calibration. The thought is that since we've found the slider values at which the NSUM value drops by 50%, that's roughly similar to being able to say that the center of the gaussian beam is at the very edge of the diode.
SR2 P slider | SR2 Y slider | Slider change | |
AS_C centered | -5.9 | 2066.9 | N/A starting position |
AS_C Nsum 50% +pitch | 154.1 | 2066.9 | +160 in pitch |
AS_C Nsum 50% -pitch | -153.9 | 2066.9 | -148 in pitch |
AS_C Nsum 50% -yaw | -5.9 | 1918.9 | -148 in yaw |
AS_C Nsum 50% +yaw | -5.9 | 2154.9 | +88 in yaw |
I'll note that the +yaw slider change is dramatically different from the other 3, so we must be hitting something different. I did double-check, and I get the same answer of 50% reduction in AS_C_NSUM when the SR2 yaw slider goes to 2154.9, so it's not a typo. The beam is starting to fall off of the AS_C camera for that position, so I can't really say if things are qualitatively different in the beam shape between the two yaw extrema. I didn't check what the beam shape looked like for the pitch extrema either.
EDIT: I forgot to add my screenshot. The Y-cursors for the purple AS_C plot in the 3rd row to be the nominal AS_C_NSUM value, and the 50% value. The y-cursors for the other plots are the slider values at the 50% NSUM points.
EDIT EDIT: Anamaria reminds me that it's possible that we could also be clipping somewhere in the path behind OM1 on the way to AS_C. That's a little hard to check, and I think the beam motion back there should be fairly small, but it's something to be mindful of.
We ran the functionality test on the main turbopumps in MY and EY. The scroll pump is started to take pressure down to low 10^-02 Torr, at which time the turbo pump is started, the system reaches low 10^-08 Torr after a few minutes, then the turbo pump system is left ON for about 1 hour, after the hour the system goes through a shut down sequence.
MY Turbo:
Bearing Life:100%
Turbo Hours: 214
Scroll Pump Hours: 78
EY Turbo:
Bearing Life:100%
Turbo Hours: 1282
Scroll Pump Hours: 78
No issues encountered for either turbopump
Tue May 14 10:15:12 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 15min 8secs
Gerardo confirmed a good fill curbside.
I checked the Kepco power supplies located at the corner station CER Mezanine.
Rack C1 - Temps < 72F, no vibrations
Rack C2 - Temps < 72F, no vibrations
Rack C3 - Temps < 72F, no vibrations
Rack C4 - Temps < 72F, no vibrations
Rack C5 - Temps < 72F, (U5-U7 PSL +/- 18V minor vibration noted)
Rack C6 - Temps < 72F, no vibrations
The minor vibration on C5:U5-U7 is not major enough to warrant action, just keep an eye on this one, both supplies running old fans.