Stefan and I were wondering if someone could re-run Bruco on SRCL/PRCL/MICH on the other night good data, similarly to what Gabriele did some time ago. Also, I attach here the coherence between SRCL and IMC WFS at some point during O1; this seems much lower than what seen recently, which I think makes sense based on Sheila's IMC WFS comparison before and after the HPO was turned on.
Here are the BruCo scan on SRCL/PRCL/MICH on the other good time.
I picked up Oct. 24, 08:00 UTC as the other good time.
SRCL: https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~youngmin/BruCo/PRE-ER10/H1/Oct24/H1-SRCL-1161331217-600/
PRCL: https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~youngmin/BruCo/PRE-ER10/H1/Oct24/H1-PRCL-1161331217-600/
MICH: https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~youngmin/BruCo/PRE-ER10/H1/Oct24/H1-MICH-1161331217-600/
The results are updated using new excluded channel lists.
It looks like the coherence of the IMC WFS with the SRCL error signal is mostly above 80 Hz, where our jitter is similar to what it was during O1 according to the IMC WFS (spectra in the alog that Lisa links ).
I looked at the coherence of the two sensors used for the SRCL error signal, POP45 I and POP9I, and we can see that POP 9I has more coherence with the IMC WFS at the frequencies where we think accoustic motion of mounts on the PSL table dominate the jitter.
