This is a belated alog from Tuesday.
Starting point: Same alignment for MC123, IM123 as last Friday, i.e. the IM4 baffle NOT centered nor unclipped.
Without touching IMC and IM1/2/3, we rotated IM4 to steer the beam close enough to the nominal beam position in front of PR2, and measured the beam position horizontally and vertically relative to the known screw hole in front of PR2 and PRM.
The distance between IM4-PRM beam line as of now relative to the nominal PRM-PR2 center line was calculated to be 3.9+-1.1mm in -Y direction and too low by 2.9+-1.1mm. See measurement_cartoon.jpg for the horizontal position case. Height is derived in the same way. Since the beam position in front of PR2 is not grossly off, and since IM4 is much, much closer to PRM than PR2, you can use these numbers as the spot position on PRM, too.
From IM4baffle_20260526.jpg, centering the beam on PRM will correct the height on IM4 baffle (HA12). Horizontally it will within a couple mm or so from the center.
As we're running out of time, give up the idea to understand what happened to the alignment during the vent before closing HAM2. We should recenter things whenever possible (but only when the IFO REFL path and POP sled path are not disturbed to the point we clip or lose the beam).
following is the table of slider offsets as of now.
| IM1 | IM2 | IM3 | IM4 | |
| PIT | 517 | 810 | -614 | 531 |
| YAW | -387 | -88 | 385 | 64 |
Even though the physical PIT angle of the optics relative to the local vertical axis is arbitrary, it seems that IM1 is bringing the beam down on IM2, IM2 is bringing down the beam further on IM3, and IM3 is bringing up the beam on IM4 and PRM. But IM2 is twise as efficient as IM3 for changing the beam position on PRM. Besides, the beam is already coming down from MC2 to MC3 (about 10mm height difference over 16m, or about 220urad) and I don't know if it makes sense to use IM2 to bring the beam further down. It's worth redistributing PIT as well as YAW offsets to relieve big offsets.
However, note that ultimately IM1-IM2 line defines the IFO REFL path when PRM retroreflects. (Even if you rotate IM2, as far as IM1-IM2 line doesn't change the IFO refl beam won't move.) I won't touch IM1 as moving the beam on e.g. IM2 even just a few mm using IM1 (i.e. a few mm over ~1.8m leverarm) will result in a much bigger change for REFL path in HAM1, potentially risking yet another clipping or maybe the loss of the REFL beam. IMC alignment noted above will change the IM1-IM2 line, but that's basically the angle change of ~3.6mm/16m (i.e. an order of magnitude smaller than when moving IM1 to steer the beam on IM2 in a meangful amplitude). That's small enough it's hard to imagine that the beam will be clipped by IFO refl baffle nor the downstream optics.
So,
|
PIT |
IM2 | IM3 | IM4 | PRM |
| IM2 (810 -> 310, negative 500urad) | 0 | 1.2 | +2.8 | +3.5mm |
| IM3 (-614.7 -> -434.7, positive 180urad) | -0.4 | -0.6mm | ||
| Total change | 1.2 | 2.4 | 2.9mm (higher) | |
| Position as of now | -2.9mm (too low) |
| YAW | IM2 | IM3 | IM4 | PRM |
| From MC2 beam spot change |
0.4mm (-X) |
0.6mm (-X) | 1mm (-X) | 1.2mm (+Y) |
| IM2 (-88 -> 112urad, positive 200urad change) | 0.5mm (-X) | 1.1mm (-X) | 1.4mm (+Y) | |
| IM3 (385urad -> 0, negative 385 urad change) | 0.9mm (-X) | 1.3mm (+Y) | ||
| Total change | 0.4mm (-X) | 1.1mm (-X) | 3mm (-X) | 3.9mm (+Y) |
| Position as of now | 3.9mm (-Y) |
Of course this is assuming that the slider calibration is correct, so take this as a qualitative reference to get the sense of sign of angle changes. Anyway, when this is done, the DAC counts for IM2 and IM3 will be smaller while the beam height on PR2 will be fine.
| IM1 (no touch) | IM2 | IM3 | IM4 | |
| PIT | 517 | 810-> 310 | -614-> -434.7 | 531-> ? |
| YAW | -387 | -88-> 112 | 385-> 0 | 64-> ? |
If centering HA12 (IM4) baffle is important, relocate HA12. I'll ask Rodica.
Make sure that PRM retroreflects. Readjust if not. Check IFO REFL beam on IFO REFL baffle, LSC REFL and ASC REFL sensors.
Recenter IM4_TRANCE by pico.
Realign ISS array (simply because it's easier to do it in air than in vacuum).
Think about POP sled path. Is it conceivable that we'll somehow miss the beam there because we change the beam spot position on PRM?