Displaying reports 1-20 of 86550.Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 End
Reports until 17:14, Monday 09 February 2026
H1 CDS
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:14, Monday 09 February 2026 (89094)
h1sush7 timing glitch, models restarted

Sheila, Camilla, Jim, EJ, Dave:

At 16:29:25 we had a timing glitch on h1iopsush7 which stopped it from running. 

Sheila and Camilla checked the SDF settings for h1susfc1 and h1sussqzin models before the restarts.

I verified all the IO Chassis cards were present and correct, and then restarted all the models.

I untripped the HAM7 SWWD, but accidentally also untripped HAM1. I returned HAM1 back to PM1 bypassed, SEI-HAM1 tripped.

Images attached to this report
H1 SQZ
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:59, Monday 09 February 2026 (89093)
SUSSQZIN and SUSFC1 SDFs before restart

Dave has to restart SUS SQZ in and SUS FC1.  Camilla and I went through the SDF files and accepted all the current sliders.  
We also saw that the OPO T damp gain was changed, we did not accept that.  

Images attached to this report
LHO General
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:30, Monday 09 February 2026 (89080)
Mon Day Ops Summary

TITLE: 02/09 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:

HAM7 had viewports inspected and steps initiated for pumping down.  JAC team spent a good part of the day inspecting the in-vac EOM output beam.  The ACCESS SYSTEM computer had its network issues fixed (for Access System & cameras).
LOG:

H1 ISC (ISC)
marc.pirello@LIGO.ORG - posted 15:42, Monday 09 February 2026 - last comment - 16:19, Monday 09 February 2026(89090)
EX Ion Pump X-8 Scanned

Per WP13021

I have scanned the disabled SHV cable from EX Ion Pump X-8.  Using a 10' launch cable, on DTF setting, with bandpass set from 10MHz to 50MHz.

The attached plot is from the scan., the following aberations appeared on the cable run:
73m = 1st interface/reflection
130m = 2nd interface/reflection
361m = 3rd interface/reflection
456m = 4th interface/reflection

There were no other reflections beyond 456m.  All scans were done at C=1.

M. Pirello, G. Moreno

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
marc.pirello@LIGO.ORG - 16:19, Monday 09 February 2026 (89091)

Cable length is ~250m, assuming cable speed of about 0.5C.  Ignore every reflection after 250m.

Reflection marking end of cable is 130m from launch -10m for launch = 120m

Speed of cable = 120m/250m = 0.48C

First reflection in cable is at (73m-10m)*0.48 = 30.24m  There is likely a defect in the cable at this point due to the magnitude of the reflection here.

H1 IOO (ISC)
jennifer.wright@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:12, Monday 09 February 2026 - last comment - 17:40, Monday 09 February 2026(89088)
Checking EOM crystal

Jennie W, Jason O, Keita K.

As reported in this alog (#89073) from Masayuki and Keita, after we turned the power in HAM1 up to 1W we found a series of vertically spread ghost beams aroubnd the main beam after the EOM and before JM3.

These could not be removed by translating, yawing or pitching the EOM position relative to the beam. It was decided in a larger meeting with EOM design personnel that we would first check if the crystal was cracked or damaged anywhere in case this is the cause.


First photo shows the EOM from above, using a green torch to illuminate the beam path. I can't see any scatter from defects or cracks in the crystal.

Second photo shows possibly a chip at the corner, but this should not affect the beam as its right at the edge.

Third and fourth show side view with illumination from the top at an angle.


In summary we did not see any 'smoking gun' to cause these ghost beams.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 17:40, Monday 09 February 2026 (89092)INS, IOO, ISC

Very rough power estimate for the ghost beam(s) is ~O(1%)

Jennie and Jason set up another temporary iris between JM2 and JM3, centered it with 1W into HAM1 to carefully block the ghost beams without blocking the main beam, then changed the power to 100mW (for safety) and measured the power at various places. Measurement accuracy cannot be great (Jennie and Jason says the numbers were jumping around as it was difficult to hold the power meter head at a fixed position mid-air) but I would say the power in the ghost beams is ~O(1%). 

JAC out ~105mW
Between JM2 and the iris (includes wrong-pol beam) 104~105mW
After the iris 99~100mW
Wrong-pol beam 1~3mW
Background light (no beam) 1~2uW

Where do they go?

After opening the temporary iris that we just put in all the way, the iris just downstream of JM3 was already blocking some of the ghost beams as well as the wrong polarization beam (JM3iris.jpg). Vertical beams don't look vertical because the iris is not a flat plane and we have a large parallax here. Anyway, it seems that we can block further if we want to from the top and the bottom.

The picture of the last iris on HAM1 shows that something is blocked on the left (+Y) side (outputiris.jpg). Looks like the iris is clipping something on the right but the camera couldn't be positioned to have a good view for both sides.

The last picture (after_last_iris.jpg) shows the beam right after the last iris on HAM1. You can see that some ghost beams are still coming through.

With this beam injected into HAM2 and misaligning MC2, we looked into IOT2L to see the MC REFL beam. We weren't able to find ghost beams there, though Jason and I felt that the beam is not super clean.

One question Jason had was whether or not the diverging beams that originate from the EOM location are supposed to keep diverging after lenses. 

Images attached to this comment
X1 SUS
ibrahim.abouelfettouh@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:04, Monday 09 February 2026 (89087)
BBSS Put in Can

Randy, Ibrahim

Randy and I put the BBSS in the can today, as shown by pictures.

Following LLO's advice from their experiences in alog 79950, we were able to use the aluma lift to can the BBSS. What we did in order:

1. Strip locked-mass BBSS of all cables, check for looseness, bring alum-a-lift into position to lift BBSS from lifitng bars

2. Undo dog clamps to let lift take suspension load, ensure suspension is secured on the lift. Move BBSS out of test stand - as LLO said, very small clearance.

3. Prepare temporary platform for lift fork adjustment

4. Set BBSS on temporary platform - this part was successful but needed extra blocks to avoid interference with Y-bracks on the Lower Structure.

5. Adjust forks to be allow for canning without bottoming out, relift.

6. Put into wiped-down can and check for looseness. Rewipe, check for particulate and ensure secure fit

7. Close doors.

See pictures below.

Images attached to this report
H1 PSL
ryan.short@LIGO.ORG - posted 11:26, Monday 09 February 2026 (89086)
PSL 10-Day Trends

FAMIS 31124

FSS has been on and off over the past week and the PZT has been swept several times for JAC install work, but otherwise not much to report this week.

Images attached to this report
LHO VE
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 10:16, Monday 09 February 2026 (89085)
Mon CP1 Fill

Mon Feb 09 10:10:47 2026 INFO: Fill completed in 10min 44secs

 

Images attached to this report
H1 SEI (SEI)
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:12, Monday 09 February 2026 (89082)
H1 ISI CPS Noise Spectra Check - Weekly (FAMIS #39337)

FAMIS Link:  39337

Only CPS channels which look higher at high frequencies (see attached) would be the following:

  1. ETMx_ST1 H1
  2. ETMx_ST1 H2
  3. ETMy_ST1 H2
  4. ETMy_ST2 H1

In the bash window we get this note:

"HAM high freq noise is elevated for these sensor(s)!!!:       HAM1_CPSINF_V2  &  V3 "

H1 CDS
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 07:49, Monday 09 February 2026 (89081)
mains minor power glitch 06:49:45

The GC UPS reported a brief switch to battery power this morning due to a minor glitch in power on all three phases. The MSR UPS did not report.

Images attached to this report
LHO General
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 07:41, Monday 09 February 2026 - last comment - 08:49, Monday 09 February 2026(89079)
Mon Day Ops Transition

TITLE: 02/09 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
    Wind: 6mph Gusts, 4mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.34 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

HAM7 not pumped down.  HAM1 JAC work continues. LVEA is in the Bifurcated Laser SAFE state. And Seahawks are Super Bowl Champs!

Comments related to this report
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - 08:49, Monday 09 February 2026 (89083)

Coordination Meeting Notes:

  • HAM7:  VAC team look at viewports, and then pump down today.
  • Ion Pump swaps continue this week
  • HAM1:  This will go into next week (they have a meeting on this work later this morning
  • Cable pulling in lvea (OPS/SEI be mindful of HEPI status)---> ISI damped HEPI offline
  • Ops EVE shifts CANCELED this week and will revisit Feb17 Week Ops EVE shift status.
LHO VE (VE)
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - posted 18:40, Sunday 08 February 2026 (89078)
HAM3 Annulus Ion Pump Replacement

(Jordan V., Gerardo M.)

-Late entry

On Friday we removed and replaced the ion pump for HAM3.  We replaced the copper gasket twice, the first gasket seal had a bad leak, it was hard to see the mating surfaces due to visibility issues (laser safety goggles and not enough light).
After installing a second gasket, we started pumping down the annulus system and pressure went down fast.  Last pressure reading at the aux-cart was 4.63x10^-05 Torr.
BTW, we have other 4 (four) ion pumps to replace.

Images attached to this report
LHO VE
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 11:37, Sunday 08 February 2026 (89077)
Sun CP1 Fill

Sun Feb 08 10:11:56 2026 INFO: Fill completed in 11min 52secs

 

Images attached to this report
H1 IOO (IOO)
masayuki.nakano@LIGO.ORG - posted 21:56, Friday 06 February 2026 - last comment - 09:23, Monday 09 February 2026(89073)
Vertical splited beam investigation

Summary of investigation into the vertically split beam from the EOM

 

Comments related to this report
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 15:25, Saturday 07 February 2026 (89075)ISC, SYS

Horizontal beam position offset on the EOM input and output aperture on the side plates.

We realized that the nominal beam position on the EOM input and output aperture is NOT centered on the crystal cross section projected onto the side plate face, the beam is horizontally offset in +Y direction.

Look at the first cartoon (cartoon.jpg) and references therein. The beam spot offsets are 0.91mm on the input side plate and 0.54mm on the output side plate, respectively, assuming that the beam deflection angle per surface of EOM is 2.35 degrees as implied in D2500130.

0.91mm is not a small offset, it's almost 1/4 of the crystal thickness (it's 4x4x40mm).

This means that the beam should be (see nominal_sideplate.png, note that the drawing scale of the input aperture in this is twice that of the output aperture):

~3.9mm from the left (+Y) edge of the visual alignment aid notch on the input side plate,

~3.2mm from the right (again +Y) edge of the aperture hole on the output side plate.

Measurements, adjustments and measurements made the beam closer to the nominal location.

Based on the above knowledge, we took pictures of the beam position on the input/output aperture, paying attention to the errors that could arise from the parallax (which is unavoidable), i.e. the sensor card should be as close to the face of the side plate as possible and the beam spot on the sensor card should be as close to the sentor of the camera sensor as possible. This was a tougher job than you think.

Anyway, in the first round of measurements, we convinced ourselves that the beam was:

off in -Y direction by 0.7mm relative to the nominal beam position on the input plate of the EOM,

off in +Y direction by 0.5mm on the output,

give or take 0.2mm or so (the error is based on two pictures for the input beam position with random variation in parallax coming from camera position and the distance between the side plate surface and the viewer card).

We rotated the entire EOM base by using two dog clamps against the EOM base and inserting appropriate shims (EOM_rotation.png). We didn't use the YAW adjustment feature for the EOM pivot plate because there's no way to rotate it in a  controlled manner.

After the first adjustment we thought that the beam coming out of the EOM looked better (which might have been false). On the second adjustment the beam looked the same or slightly worse (which might have been false) and we reverted back to the same position as the first adjustment.

According to the pictures (input_measured.jpg and output_measured.jpg), the beam position is 
0.2mm off in -Y direction on the input,
0.6mm off in -Y direction on the output,
again give or take 0.2mm or so. Apparently the input got much better, we overshot for the output but it's not worse.
 
This is the last measurement done based on the pictures. After this, we reset the dog clamps without shims and used them as the YAW reference.
Images attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 15:55, Saturday 07 February 2026 (89076)INS, ISC, SYS

Multiple beams mostly in PIT coming out of EOM (pictures and history)

1W into HAM1, otherwise it's hard to photograph these clearly.

The first picture is right after the YAW adjustment was made but before adjusting PIT. The card is held just ABOVE the main beam, you can see four blobs that look like some kind of ghost beams. (If you try to picture the main beam, it's so bright these ghosts become hard to capture.)

The second picture is after the first PIT adjustment. You can only see maybe two blobs, but later we found that the rest went below the main beam (sorry no "below" picture).

So, to recap the history of the beam quality,

  1. Feb/03-04 (alog 89041).
    • The beam had horisontal line that was clearly visible even at 100mW input (horizontalstreak.jpg).
    • JAC beam was found to be higher than 1mm relative to the EOM, the latter was raised, the horizontal line was gone but I noted "but there was still a vertical streak that was hard to photograph".
    • Then the EOM was adjusted in YAW, I still noted "not sure if it's great though, it's hard to photograph but something faint might be coming out of the EOM". But note that the power was 100mW.
  2. Feb/05 (alog 89059)
    • With 1W input, Jason and Masayuki clearly saw multiple ghost beams in PIT above the main beam.
  3. Feb/06 (this alog)
    • EOM was adjusted in YAW, seemingly no change i.e.there were still multiple ghost beams in PIT.
    • Adjusting the EOM PIT angle made ghost beams go up and down relative to the main beam, but they didn't seem to go away.

Other things.

Just to make sure, we turned down the 9MHz and 45MHz RF power to 3dBm and disconnected the 118MHz and 24MHz cables and nothing changed.

We know that the crystal wedge is supposed to be horizontal and we know that the wedge orientation is correct. When we first installed the EOM in chamber, the EOM transmission was deflected horizontally in +Y direction.

Images attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 09:23, Monday 09 February 2026 (89084)

Curoius thing about the EOM dimensions

Crystal length L=40mm, thickness T=4mm=L/10, wedge angle w=2.85 deg, and tan(2w) = 0.09981 ~ 1/10.  

Though this is probably not related to the ghost beams in PIT direction, when the beam is perfectly aligned with the EOM (i.e. the light traveling the center of the crystal), the internal AR reflection of at the output face of the crystal hits the side of the crystal and the specular reflection will hit the input surface of the crystal and almost exactly comes back on top of the main beam with only 0.0272mm offset. See the 1st cartoon.

Note that the side surfaces are not polished (though the AOI is 84.3 deg so most of the power is reflected back into the crystal due to total internal reflection).

If you displace the beam in horizontal direction, the AR path is displaced in the opposite direction by about the same amount (i.e. if the main beam moves by 0.5mm toward the short face of the crystal, the AR-side-AR beam moves by about 0.5mm toward the long face). If you continue tracing the AR-side-AR beam, it turns out that the AR-side-AR-AR-side-AR beam will come back exactly on the main beam. See the 2nd cartoon (which is actually to scale, the main beam is off by 0.5mm and the 1st ghost is off by 0.5272 in the opposite direction, and the 2nd ghost is on top of the main beam).

Interesting design choice.

Images attached to this comment
H1 SQZ (SQZ)
daniel.desantis@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:19, Monday 15 December 2025 - last comment - 13:51, Monday 09 February 2026(88515)
Recabling OPO in HAM7

[Sheila, Eric, Jim, Kar Meng, Daniel D.]

When we started working this morning, the particle counts were 20/10/10 per cubic foot

It looked like the old cable for the PZT that needs to be replaced was routed to back into the chamber to a cable bracket which was far from reach. Before we can remove it, we need to find the cable harness plan for HAM7.

In the mean time, we were able to re-route the TEC cable using photos from this alog

### Broke for lunch ###

Over lunch, we determined the correct connector for the PZT/translation stage was on CB5 in HAM7. It's labeled cable #4 according to the wiring diagram. We also verified the correct operation of the TEC controller and the oven from CDS

After we returned, the particle counts were 0/0/0 per cubic foot and we uncovered the chamber to finish replacing the cables.

Unfortunately, cable #4 between CB5 (see image) and the OPO is terminated in a male molded connector, which is screwed into the connector bracket. This meant that we needed to remove the female cable (from the flange) from the rear of the connector and then remove the male connector (to OPO) from the cable bracket. Jim came in to help us reach the connector and he decided that it would be easier to remove the top and second-from-top connectors (3rd and 4th on CB5 in the wiring plan) from the bracket to make it easier to reach the ones for cable #4. Jim was able to remove the old cable and replace it with the new one in the bracket.

After Jim left, we were able to continue reinstalling the new cable. The longest DB-9 tentacle on the new cable is for the VOPO PZTs, the DB-15 is for the stage control, and the short DB-9 is a spare which was coiled to the side. We were then able to connect the piezo and stage control connectors to the OPO and roughly re-route the cabling on the ISI table. Final routing and securing of these new cables/checking for mistakes is still required.

 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 13:51, Monday 09 February 2026 (89089)

Cable removed was D1700438-V2-00-S2101231

Displaying reports 1-20 of 86550.Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 End