J. Kissel, R. Kumar

Since we really have no precedent for "which suspensions do we check for rubbing when after what level of vent activity?" Rahul and I are refreshing our memory on how to take rubbing check transfer functions on the SUS in HAM5. 

I've gathered data for SUS SRM, the data look OK -- good enough to proceed. 
I see several things of which I'm suspicious about, but will then proceed to wave my hands around and explain away what I think is going on, and or why it'll be good enough.
Take a look primarily at the second attachment, allhstss_2018-10-11_H1SUSHSTS_SRM_Phase3b_UnDamped_ALL_ZOOMED_TFs.pdf.
(1) In all DOFs, the data looks a bit noisy for a SUS that is under vacuum. BUT -- the HAM5 ISI is only "damped" not fully isolated, HAM5 HPI is still locked, and the adjacent, HAM6 chamber is open with full purge going and people in it actively debugging the SQZ green fiber. So, I expect that things will still be a bit noisy. We can still resolve primary and cross-coupled resonances, so we can still assess the dynamics.
(2) In all DOFs, the overall scale of the transfer functions seem to be gradually dropping over the *years*. I suspect that this a result of the OSEM LED decay over time, which is a known issue on most-if-not-all-suspensions that we won't be doing anything about for quite some time. See FRS 10093
(3) In several DOFs, there appears to be more cross coupling than the model, or the previous, fully-isolated, fully-vacuumed, measurement. E.g. in the L2L TF, at 2.078 Hz, or T2T TF, at 2.234 Hz, or in the Y2Y TF, at 2.812 Hz. There are several reason we can use to say "meh -- good enough."
    (a) The all of the "primary" resonances, in the diagonal degrees freedom line up nicely with the model and previous measurements.
    (b) Where we do see the smaller, cross-coupling, resonances in one diagonal TF, they line up well with the primary resonances of other TFs degrees of freedom.
    (c) The DOFs which are cross-coupling together are DOFs that we expect to cross couple together, either mechanically (e.g. the 2.2354 Hz cross-coupling resonance in T2T is showing the primary R2R mode), or because those DOFs are sensed by the same sensors, just one is common and the other is differential (e.g. the 2.812 Hz mode in Y2Y is the poorly subtracted 3rd primary L2L mode because, say, there's lots on power in the L2L mode, or the sensor gains [i.e. the LEDs] have decayed differently over time).

%% Measurement Details
The raw data live here:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM1/Data/
    2019-10-11_1804_H1SUSSRM_M1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
    2019-10-11_1804_H1SUSSRM_M1_WhiteNoise_P_0p02to50Hz.xml
    2019-10-11_1804_H1SUSSRM_M1_WhiteNoise_R_0p02to50Hz.xml
    2019-10-11_1804_H1SUSSRM_M1_WhiteNoise_T_0p02to50Hz.xml
    2019-10-11_1804_H1SUSSRM_M1_WhiteNoise_V_0p02to50Hz.xml
    2019-10-11_1804_H1SUSSRM_M1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml
following the "remember to think about" steps of (now updated) instructions on the awiki: wiki/Suspensions/OpsManual/TFs

I've exported and processed the individual data using:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/Common/MatlabTools/
    plotHSTS_dtttfs_M1.m
and added the individual measurement to the collection of data and processed today's against previous with the plotall script that lives here:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/Common/MatlabTools/
    plotallhsts_tfs_M1.m
remembering that Brett wrote a convenient script to update the reference number of the VERY long list measurements that lives here:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/Common/MatlabTools/
    plotallsus_index_updater.m
(all were svn up'ed before I got started).