Firstly, a set of PR2 (HSTS) M1-M1 TFs were taken, with damping loops OFF, for all DOFs (see 2012-10-03_H1SUSPR2_M1_ALL_TFs.pdf), which show good agreement with the model. These TFs were then repeated, but with damping loops ON.  

Both damped and undamped TFs obtained have been compared to all other LLO HSTSs at the equivalent test Phase 3a, (see allhstss_2012_10_04_Phase3a_PR2_ALL_ZOOMED_TFs.pdf). 

Power spectra have been taken with damping loops both ON and OFF for each stage (see 2012-10-04_1015_H1SUSPR2_M*_ALL_Spectra.pdf).

Power spectra data, with both damping ON and OFF can then be compared to LLO PR2 during Phase 3a testing (see allhstss_2012-10-01_Phase3a_PR2_ALL_Spectra_Don.pdf and allhstss_2012-10-01_Phase3a_PR2_ALL_Spectra_Doff.pdf). n.b. the purge-air was off for the LLO measurements. 

In addition, power spectra for specific degrees of freedom (L, P and Y) can be more conveniently compared across multiple stages (M1, M2 and M3) of the same suspension in the final plot found below (see allhstss_2012-10-01_Phase3a_PR2_H1SUSPR2_M1M2M3_Spectra_ALL_Don.pdf).

Finally, all data, plots and scripts have been committed to the susSVN as of this entry.

This should now provide sufficient data to be able to complete Phase 3a testing of this suspension.