TITLE: 06/15 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
    Wind: 9mph Gusts, 5mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.09 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

Dust counts high in optics lab even though wind is low

Below is the analysis for data taken on the FC path: between ZM1 and ZM2 and between ZM2 and ZM3, with Nanoscan, see Camilla's log 90573. As a reminder, ZM1 are flat optics, ZM2 is a PSAM with variable curvature, FC1 HR side is flat, AR side is curved with RoC ~1m. 

The data suggest that the OPO mode is slightly different from O4 OPO, and also strongly suggest a new optimal ZM2 PSAM voltage can be found within the range. 

We measured the beam profile at 5 different points after ZM1 with A:L2 lens at its nominal 0 position (sled that the lens lives on is flush to its translation stage on both front and back edges). At the last point with A:L2 at 0, we realized it would be pertinent to measure beam profiles for the two extremities of the A:L2 translation stage: -13 mm, which is closer to ZM1 by 13 mm and +17 mm, which is 17 mm further from ZM1. We then proceeded to take 5 measurements (again downstream from ZM1) for each of these lens positions. The nanoscan screenshots for each measurement are attached in the .zip folder. 

The attached gif shows the beam waist position estimation extracted from the beam profile scans downstream ZM1, for all three A:L2 positions. The "target" and "O4 x/y" come from Keita's log 59515. The overlap plot attached shows the field overlap in percentage for all three A:L2 positions, with target and O4 beam parameters. With A:L2@0, the overlaps are above 99%, which bodes well for the FC mode matching prospects. There could potentially be a better mode matching solution to the "target" or "O4" for A:L2 between 0 pos and -13mm pos. However, the following measurements betwen ZM2 and ZM3 suggest fine-tuning of A:L2 position will not be necessary. 

We also measured beam profile between ZM2 and ZM3 for three different points, setting ZM2 PSAM voltage to 4 different values at each point. The "nominal" O4 strain gauge (S.G.) for ZM2 has been 3.15 V, which corresponds to ~ 60 or 90 V pzt supply voltage depending on which direction one scans from. The edges of the psam range are 0 V and 196 V, which corresponds to ~1.2-1.3 V and ~6.04 V S.G. respectively. In the interest of more uniform sampling of the available psam curvatures, we also chose to sample 4.5 V S.G. (~120 V or 150 V). 

This table shows experimental data mapped to radii of curvature of the ZM2 mirror, using Camille's E2100298. The exact PZT strain gauge/ PZT supply voltage that gives a certain RoC is affected by the hysteresis curve i.e. sweep direction.

Attached gif for propagation between FC1 and ZM2 show esimated beam parameters for all four SG cases: 1.3, 3.1x, 4.4x and 6.0x V. The exact values for the strain gauge varied from one beam profile position to the next, however it should be good enough to tell if we have enough range on ZM2 or not.

The gif switches between different SG values once every 2 second, the lefthand plot is useful in looking at the beam divergence near FC1 while the righthand plot is a zoom-in around the beam waist. Looking at the estimated beam waist position for 1.3 V and 3.1x V cases switching across the "FC x/y waist", "VOPO target waist", ''O4 x/y waist", we can guess there could be a better mode matching solution between these two SG values. "FC x/y waist" comes from the Finesse eigenmode solution for the FC path (thanks Kevin Kuns!), target and O4 values are the same from the above-mentioned Keita log, assuming ZM2 curvature to be 0.85025 m (3.15V SG), and the following distances between the optics: A:M3 --> ZM1: 158.2 mm, ZM1--> ZM2: 1498.625 mm, ZM2 --> ZM3: 1821.497 mm, ZM3--> FC1: 1000.261 mm. Camilla extracted these distance values from D1900365-v1.

Knowing the applied PZT voltage and the corresponding RoC, we can use the measurements at 3.1x V and 1.3 V to estimate the mode matching we would obtain if we swept the RoC between that of these strain gauge values. The attached FC mode matching projection plot is computed by taking beam parameter estimated from the beam size measurements for 3.1x V, propagates the beam back to ZM2, unapplies the estimated RoC (decreasing RoC value was used informed by data, indicated in bold in the above table), then reapplies the RoC between these two values, after the overlap with the FC eigenmode is calculated. This projection suggests that mode-matching points with >99% overlap for both x and y axes are accessible. Clearly, there is varying astigmatism with strain gauge setting, see beam profile plots where 3.1x and 6.0x V shows beams with smaller astig. than the other two points. Since the PSAM characterization data gives only a single RoC number rather than separate x/y effective curvatures, the projection should be interpreted as approximate. In practice, the final optimization should be done empirically.

The effect of the astigmatism is also apparent in this defocus vs beam size at FC1 plot that shows mode matching contours. The calculation is made at the FC1.p2.o plane in Finesse.

TITLE: 06/12 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:
CRS Team spent some time working in the H2 PSL. 
I beleave some OMC work was done near HAM 6.
The SQZr team did some quick SQZr work before Begum left.
VAC team started heating up the RGA , and has put up some caution tape. 

LOG:

[Begum, Sheila]

Alignment: After the preliminary alignment work yesterday, see Camilla log 90593, we proceeded to attack the OMC scan problem step by step, starting with alignment. We aligned ZM4 and ZM5 using the two irises on SQT7 table as references. ZM4 was used for the first iris just past the periscope, ZM5 for the further iris. We reverted ZM6 and SRC alignment to O4 slider settings.  Then we used ZM6 and SRC to align the beam on AS-AIR camera and AS_C QPD. 
Then we turned on AS_A/B DC centering servos (actuators: OM1 & OM2), and OMC QPD DC centering servos (acutators: OM3 & OMC). This saturated the OMC_M1 T2&T3 outputs. AS_A/B servos align the input beam to the right pos/ang on OM3 and QPD servos should be able to align this beam to the OMC without saturating. While HAM6 is isolated and HAM7 is locked, HAM5 isn't isolated. Aligning the beam to the SQZT7 irises should condition the beam out of HAM7 well, so perhaps the issue is the HAM5 nonaligned state. (I did try to reset the watchdog, it immediately went back to tripped state.) 
Then we tried turning on only the OMC QPD DC centering loops, without the AS_A/B loops, and this worked! OMC sus is no longer saturating, and the mode scans look more reasonable, see attached preliminary scan. The beam is also bouncing a lot less on OMC QPDs compared to when the AS_A/B centering loops are on. 

Setting the scan: Conducting OMC scans in air is no easy feat. The PZT scan should be quick enough to not inherit the beam jitter, but also slow enough to properly sample the maxima of peaks, without running into anti whitening problems. During new HAM6 installation at LLO, this meant turning of HAM6 and corner purge as well as cleanrooms nearby (vertex cleanroom was okay to leave off, although vertex purge needed to be turned off). Keita suggested installing a PD in the OMC trans camera can, and using such a (non-whitened) PD for the OMC scans. 
Screenshot of the sliders for the preliminary scan we took today, plot showing the magnitude of the second order mode, and the fundamental mode, with these awggui pzt scan settings. Once a reliable measurement flow is achieved, we would like to automate ZM4/5 psam scan + OMC scan to estimate the achievable SQZ-OMC & SQZ-IFO mode matching limits. 
 

The ETMY BRS seems to be continuously ringing up. I've tried to make the changes to the thresholds which was the previous fix outlined in 87634 for the same BRS, and will check back in on it later to see if just increasing the thresholds helped at all.

Changed thresholds:

H1:ISI-GND_BRS_ETMY_LOWTHRESHOLD 800-->2000

H1:ISI-GND_BRS_ETMY_HIGHTHRESHOLD 2000-->4000 Changed

Additonally I changed the ETMX BRS drift control to 6.00V and the ETMY BRS to 2.00V to try and better center them

WP13311 Check production first 20bit-DACs

FRS38169

For the five production front ends which have a 20bit-DAC sharing A1 with an updated time card, we have either verified that there is no problem seen (h1susb2h23, h1iscex) or we identified and fixed the problem by either shifting the ADC/DAC cards (h1sush7, h1oaf0) or downgraded the timing card (h1cdsh8).

Attached is a snap shot of our working spredsheet. This will be cleaned up and put into DCC.

TITLE: 06/12 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
    Wind: 13mph Gusts, 9mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

It was requested that I try to trend the Oplevs this morning, but the BS SUS screen is full of white boxes that claim their channels don't exit when NDscoped. Tagging CDS. 

I did however find the Input Pointing Trends button which gave me the following: 
IMs 
BSCs (No motion on the BS channels here though which is some SUS-picious BS)
MCs
PRMs

 

WP13324 Fix h1cdsh8 20bit-DAC

Marc, Fil, EJ, Tony, Dave:

Thursday 11jun2026 work was done on h1cdsh8 to fix its first 20bit-DAC. Prior to this we verified, using h1susfc2 and iop drives, that all 7 channels being used were broken by the timing card upgrade 13apr2026.

We had two options: move all the IO-cards one slot to the left, or downgrade the timing-card firmware. For h1cdsh8 we decided to do the latter. (Note that h1sush7 and h1oaf0 were fixed with the former).

After powering h1cdsh8 down, EJ worked on documenting the BIOS settings for this W22-45 computer. This is to investigate the W22-45 issue we are seeing in the EE shop in which the combination of 0x635 and 20bit-DAC prevents the IOP model from running.

I went to the IO-Chassis in the Filter Cavity End Station building (FCES) and removed the 0x635 card (S2101106) and replaced it with a 0x1f0 card (S2101117) which Marc had reprogrammed.

The only issue was moving the Avago Single Mode SFP from the old card to the new. This SFP was damaged, its pull bar had broken off. Taking the card back to the EE shop, Fil was able to extract the SFP. I found an equivalent spare SFP (the last spare) which is complete with its pull bar.

We think the only difference between the TLZ and the TPZ is the plastic locking mechanism.

Following the upgrade I tested ch7 using the IOP's Duotone loop-back, this is working now (did not work this morning). Tony got h1susfc2 driving again, but I was unable to get the FASTIMON aux channels to verify ch0-5 were driving.

Fil and I went to the IO Chassis and verified ch0-5 were working using a breakout board and DVM. We verified the binary cards were working and that all the SUS chassis were operational. We are handing FC2 over to SUS for verification. 

Erik, Oli

Now that we don't need the BSFM model anymore, we can move the BBSS model over into h1susbs (it was temporarily on h1suslo12). It's been committed to svn as r35313.

I moved the BBSS model from h1suslo12 over to h1susbs. Then I made some more changes to get everything up and running. Both h1susbs and h1suslo12 were successfully able to build on h1build.

Things updated/added/removed:

h1susbs (r35313) - moved what was in h1suslo12 at the time over to h1susbs and then made the following changes:

• Changed dcuid from 188 (h1suslo12) to 31 (h1susbs)
• Changed name of BBSS block from BBSS to BS
• Changed top level channel names from BBSS to BS
• Added in PCIE senders and receivers for ISC, Dither, SUPOINT, IFOTRIG, and CALCS
  • Had a bug where the bus selectors weren't naming themselves properly and so rcg was getting confused, but Erik figured out the issue and we just had to edit the new bus names

BBSS_QOSEM_MASTER (r35312):

• Added M3_WIT_{L,P,Y} to the DAQ channel list (committed to svn as r35296)
• Removed the USER DACKILL because we don't need it anymore (committed to svn as r35312)

h1suslo12 (r35318):

• Reverted back to what it looked like after r34977 (see 90358)

R. Crouch, J. Warner, J. Oberling, M. Robinson

We made some more HEPI moves today to better position the BBS SUS cage.  The results are shown in the 1st attachment.  The deviations listed in the attachment are the deviations from nominal, but that is not our target here.  To better position the BBS optic we are trying to match our position and yaw from the test stand.  As a reminder, I've attached the final SUS cage alignment from the test stand (2nd and 3rd attachments).  The table below shows our current deviations from the test stand alignment (all units in mm):

We wanted to bias to the negative by ~0.3 mm in both X and Y since our BBS test stand alignment had a +0.3 mm deviation in both X and Y position, so this looks pretty good.  The Z axis indicates a potential off level in the cartridge assembly, but one has to be very careful in assessing level based on these measurements.  These measurements are all done in the LHO Global coordinate system, which is tilted w.r.t. the local level in the WBSC2 chamber (see T0900340), so you cannot level to global coordinates; if one did then the suspension would then hang weird as it doesn't care about our different coordinate systems, it just hangs along the local gravity vector.  Jim is planning on using an autolevel to measure the top of the keel mass of the ISI's Stage 2 to see how that looks (similar to what LLO did).

In addition, the yaw of the SUS cage also closely matches our test stand alignment.  Our target, from the 3rd attachment, is 44.9979° from the +X axis and we are currently measuring 45.0025°.  This is a difference of 0.0046°, or ~80 µrad, in the CCW direction, so pretty close to our target.  We won't know for sure how good the pointing alignment is until we can use the BBS OpLev, which is not currently available (the channels do not yet exist, per Oli the plan is to add them next week), but my hope from today's work is that we'll be pretty close.

So next steps are to have the BBS OpLev available so we can assess our pointing alignment and the attachment of the HEPI actuators.  We'll have to measure position again after the HEPI actuators are attached, so we aren't quite done yet.

Sheila, Begum, Keita, Camilla

We followed 80010 to set up, additionally Sheila had us stop the OMC ASC and DC centering loops before running the scan. We moved SRM in Pitch to center beam on AS AIR camera. Cheated the dark offset via adding an offset to H1:OMC-DCPD_SUM_OFFSET.

Started with 1.1mW on SQZt7 IR PD1.06mW on AS_C, 74 and 75 on AS_A and AS_B, 1.06mW on OMC_A and 0.82mW on OMC_B. We were seeing the OMC diodes saturating (via H1:OMC-DCPD_A_WINDOW_EXCEED and H1:OMC-DCPD_B_WINDOW_EXCEED), the same was true after increasing scan length to 200s and reducing SEED input power form 75mW to 50mW in, we checked this did not happen in September 86965. We also turned down the purge air in HAM7, again, did not help.

We tried locking the OMC with the SQZ beam and were unable. 

We did not saturate the PDs with SEED power down to 25mW but the peaks were noisy at the beam was moving and the mis-alignment peak was too large. We got an upper limit of 10% mode mismatch, which is not useful, attached.

We looked back at January data, should be very simular and although the misalignment is bad, the lower limit on modemamthcing is 1.18%, which is very good. See 90598

Ibrahim, Betsy, Anamaria

Upon first in-chamber BBS01 inspection, we found 3 large clumps of spots approximately 100mm from the edge. We're consulting GariLynn at CIT for steps on how to clean.

Acetone swab: We tried to go over the spots with a cotton swab with acetone, but the spots remained.

First contact: We then tried to first contact a small portion with one thin layer, but the spots remained.

While there's no evidence that the beamsplitter was contacted, dinked, touched or scratched in anyway, this might be a cause for the damage. There is texture to the spots upon brushing them with a swab and while it seems more likely that these are above the surface, we are not totally sure.

Hypotheses (and their problems)

1. Peek In-Vac cable scratch: maybe an in-vac cable fell on that area but they would have had to imprint multiple times with some force to show something like this. 

2. Falling foil: maybe a piece of foil fell onto the surface and scratched it that way? No foil was used or wrapped at height during BBS and again, the foil would have had to fall with some heft.

3. There-the-whole-time: Maybe the spots were there the whole time and are invisible to non-chamber conditions. Because this is on the AR side, there is no good scatter plot of the surface. Since we did not see this in normal light conditions, but immediately saw this in chamber (dark) conditions, this may have been there all along. The spots are quite large (as attachments show), so this makes that less likely.

4. Dry first contact: Maybe it's dry first contact? We went over some of the spot with acetone but it stayed. We also first contacted a thin layer on one part but it stayed. The nature of the spots do look like they're small first contact bubbles. We found the first contact sheet that we used on that side and indeed, there are some similar streaks in size but nothing conclusive. We're looking at matching the spot with the first contact to see if there is a streak in this region. Problem is - first contact wouldve come off quick with the acetone treatment. So this is also not likely it.

What to do next:

- Analyze with Dino-Lite: We're going to zoom in on the spots with our DinoLite mount to get a better look. This could tell us if they are truly scratches or stuck particulate.

- Match first contact sheet with spots: Seeing if these spots were visible during FC (done on May 6) - alog 90149. Nothing visible. 

- Anamaria suggested at any rate shining a gaussian beam at it to analyze the damage in a short experiment to characterize. 

TITLE: 06/11 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:
More Fist contacting the Beam Splitter was done along with Top Gunning it as well.
The SEI HEPI Team of  5 has been trying to Align HEPI. 

HAM2 SUS TF were taken.
Viewports inspected by the VAC team.
Jim Is currently taking TFs before floating the ISI in HAM2.

Dave swapped out a timing card WP 13324. 

Fast shutter is now working again, Confirmed by Sheila and Camilla.

GRB_Short E640741 @ 21:33:37 UTC
GRB_Short E640743 @ 21:43:41 UTC

LOG:

J. Freed, J. Kissel, J. Wright, T. Sadecki, TJ, Shaffer,

Continuing from 90558 (Notes are stored here).Today we completed all of the outside optical fiber install, Feedthrough install, as well as BnK Hammer of ISIK. 

We also had some trouble connecting to the picomotors through CDS but Fil and Co. seems to have fixed the issue.

In order we did:

• BnK Hammered the assembly to confirm secure to ISI and resonances are sufficiently high (~200Hz)
• Finished last PD and Pico bus cable connections to D6 feedthru
• Installed D4 feedthrough pannels
• Installed in chamber fibers but still need to be routed and respooled
• Checked and installed the fiber optic chain from PSL through SPI prep to the HAM 3 D4 feedthrough. This includes
  • SPI Prep mointor channel checks.
  • Optical network power budget (will be added to a separate alog).

Checked the baffles for the CRS on the constructed unit, everything fit fine. 

Spent time doing alignment for the other two constructed HoQIs. 01-SN008 aligned with 87% fringe visibility, this required the retroreflector on the baseplate to be rotated a bit as it wasn't quite in the correct position. 
01-SN007 spent a long time trying to align (this was also worked on the other day with limited success), couldn't get above 60% FV so we decided to take it apart and redo it with the dowel pins in place. After taking it apart we found that the QWP was damaged by the metal screw, honestly quite impressive that it was still seeing 60% FV! See photos. The sin PD cable is also damaged and will need to be fixed before we use this HoQI. 

Assembled the remaining HoQIs including the dowel pins. Need to clean the final HWPs to finish this assembly. Additionally, 01-SN006 has no PDs as it is using the faulty assembly from before, 02-SN006 connector needs to be flipped.

Current HoQI status: 2 aligned on CRS, 1 aligned, 2 with faults, 3 (mostly) constructed waiting to be aligned. 

pic 1 - broken sin pd
pic 2 - broken QWP
pic 3 - serial number for broken sin pd assembly 

[Sheila, Karmeng]

Today we checked and managed to reduce some of the saturation on ZM4, and offload it onto ZM6. The changes were undone for now.

We briefly did the power budget check, but the power measured at the output of the SFI1 is fluctuating (between 0.79mW to 1.6mW) when the input to SFI1 is at 0.79mW. The power is stable down the propagation (after AP1 and SFI2), unsure what causes the fluctuation. Will continue to look into this tomorrow.

We also did an OMC scan, the pink trace is the scan when ZM4 is in its original setting (YAW: 1779.5), and the red trace is correspond to ZM4 misalignment (YAW: 1769.5).