Thursday Ops shift summary.

TITLE: 01/09 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:
DAQ restart at 23:46 UTC

Mostly JAC & SQZer work was done today.
Fil did put hook up the HV for JAC use.
Light pipe is should and has been double checked to actually be shut.

LOG:

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
17:16	SAF	LASER HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA IS LASER HAZARD	01:35
15:59	FAC	Kim & Nellie	LVEA	yes	Technical Cleaning	18:00
16:06	Inventory	Christina	MX	N	Dropping off parts.	18:06
18:31		Mikes + Crew	LVEA	Y	Tour of the LVEA for an interview canidate	19:46
19:07	SQZ	Sheila, Kar Meng	LVEA	Y	HAM7 work cont	20:14
19:11	ISC	Rahul, Masayuki, Jason	LVEA	Y	HAM1 cabling, disconnect JM1, Rahul out b20:17	20:42
19:22	ISC	Jennie, Marc	PREP lab/ LVEA	N / Y	Grab cables and bring them to the LVEA HAM1	20:29
19:33	JAC	Betsy	HAM1	yes	checking the JAC progress	19:57
19:36	JAC	Elenna	HAM1	Y	Helping the JAC team	20:14
19:45	EE	Marc	LVEA	Y	Help ID cables at HAM1	20:29
20:53	EE	Fil	HAM1	y	Turning on High Voltage for JAC crew	21:26
21:36	JAC	Masayuki, Jennei W.	HAM1	yes	doing JAC work & research.	00:36
21:40	JAC	Elenna & Derek	LVEA	y	Rubbernecking near the HAM1 & HAM7	22:27
21:53	JAC	Jason	LVEA	yes	Working on JAC	00:48
22:45	PEM	Jim	EY	N	Getting Wind Fence numbers.	22:59
23:10	JAC	Richard	LVEA	Y	Checking on the JAC status	23:27
23:20	PCAL & JAC	Rick	PCAL Lab & LVEA	YES	Swapping spheres & then Rubbernecking past HAM1	23:44

 

new h1lsc model installed, DAQ restart was needed

Daniel, Erik, Jonathan, Dave:

we installed Daniel's modifed h1lsc model. This required a DAQ restart.

DAQ 1leg was restarted at 15:47, followed by the 0leg at 15:52.

 

PSL Cooling Water pH Test - Monthly

FAMIS 27733

pH of PSL chiller water was measured to be between 10.0 and 10.5 according to the color of the test strip.

Thu CP1 Fill

Thu Jan 08 10:02:56 2026 INFO: Fill completed in 2min 54secs

 

JAC in HAM1

[Jason, Rahul, Jennie, Betsy, Masayuki]

Summary

JM1 was swapped from a tip-tilt suspension to a fixed Siskiyou mount to improve beam stability for alignment, profiling, and JAC control. Mode matching to the JAC was measured using a beam profiler, yielding <1.5% mismatch in both axes, well within the current requirement. The JAC pedestal and body were installed in HAM1, and initial beam injection showed clear HoM resonances at the transmission port. One discrepancy in body mode damper mounting holes was identified and will be tracked via FRS.

Details

• After discussion, we decided to replace the JM1 tip-tilt suspension with a fixed Siskiyou mirror mount. This provides easier alignment, beam profiling, and more stable JAC control compared to using a suspended mirror. As reported in the previous alog, JM1 had already been aligned to the target irises with a good angle, so the position of the JM1 suspension was marked with dog clamps to allow easy recovery of the alignment after installation work. The Siskiyou mount was aligned using the same target irises.

• After switching the mirror mount, a beam profiler was set up in the reflected beam path from the fixed JM1 to measure mode matching to the JAC, as shown in the attached picture. The z-origin was defined at the position where the beam profiler cart reading was set at 16 cm along the rail. Due to cable length limitations, beam size measurements near the waist were not possible, but this was not considered a significant issue.

• The measurement results are shown in the attached plot. The target and measured beam parameters are:

  • w0_target = 548.00 µm, z0_target = −4.318e−01 m

  • w0_x = 572.01 µm, z0_x = −5.277649e−01 m

  • w0_y = 603.50 µm, z0_y = −3.736913e−01 m

• The resulting mode mismatch was 1.363% (x) and 1.455% (y). Our current target for mode mismatch is 10%, which is sufficient for achieving a reasonable JAC lock. Therefore, this result is excellent and no further adjustment is required at this stage. Fine tuning may be performed later after JAC lock, possibly after HAM1 pump-down.

• The JAC pedestal was installed and secured to the table, and the shim was placed on the pedestal.

• The JAC body was then brought into the chamber. The procedure was recorded on video. A handle (not Class-B cleaned) was temporarily attached to the JAC; it was wiped down, and aluminum foil was inserted between the handle and the JAC body. During installation, Jason and Rahul supported the body from the sides while I handled the lift into HAM1. The end caps protecting the mirrors remained installed throughout this process.

• During installation of the body mode dampers, we found that one of the screw holes specified in the drawings was missing. The location of the missing hole is shown in the attached picture. As a result, one body mode damper was shifted by one column of screw holes (a 2″ offset). We discussed this with Stephen and believe it should not cause an issue, although it will be monitored. An FRS ticket will be submitted to track this discrepancy.

• After removing the end caps, the beam was injected into the JAC for a quick alignment check. A higher-order mode (HoM) resonance was immediately observed at the transmission port, confirming successful initial alignment. The next steps are fine alignment of the input and reflected beams, followed by in-vacuum wiring.

 

Thursday Ops Shift Start

TITLE: 01/08 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, 3mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.05 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.87 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

Trello summary for today: 
HAM! -mode matching check - Laser Hazard
HAM1 - JAC install & Anignment
HAM7 - More SQZ work- Laser Hazard

LVEA is currently in Laser Hazard status.
 

 

Current Backlog of SatAmp Swap Comparisons (MC1(M2, M3), MC2(M2, M3), MC3(M2, M3), PR3(M2, M3), SR3(M2, M3), ITMX(L2), ITMY(L2), ETMX(L2), ETMY(L2))

Here are the rest of the satamp swap comparisons for the rest of the suspension/stages that we've upgraded as part of ECR E2400330. These were all swapped a while ago but I'm just getting around to making these comparisons now.

Overall, we do see a bit of improvement for these stages, although the high noise floor of the AOSEMs limits the amount of improvement we are able to see.

Notes about the results:
- ITMY L2: the original modified satamp that was swapped in on 10/14 ended up having issues and needed to be replaced on 10/16 with another modified satamp (87685). Because of this, the 'after' time that I chose here is after the second (working) satamp was installed
- ETMY L2: the original modified satamp that was swapped in on 10/14 ended up having issues and needed to be replaced on 10/24 with another modified satamp (87722). Because of this, the 'after' time that I chose here is after the second (working) satamp was installed
- SR3 M2: The comparison listed here is basically useless because it seems like there might have been something wrong with the old unmodified satamp. See 88706 for more info

Swapped Oct 14, 2025 (87469):
ITMX L2
ITMY L2 - needed to be swapped again Oct 16 (87685)
ETMX L2
ETMY L2 - needed to be swapped again Oct 24 (87722)

Swapped Oct 21, 2025 (87620):
MC1 M2, M3
MC2 M2, M3
MC3 M2, M3
PR3 M2, M3
SR3 M2, M3

 

ITMX
L2
Results:
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGL2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_L2_NoiseComparison_1443956643vs1444642495-1200.pdf
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGL2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_L2_1443956643vs1444642495-1200.mat
Data:
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGL2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSITMX_L2_1443956643_1200.mat
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGL2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSITMX_L2_1444642495_1200.mat
r12824

ITMY
L2
* Since the satamp swapped in on 10/14 had issues and had to be swapped out on 10/16 for another modified satamp (87685), the 'after' time is with the working modified satamp
Results:
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGL2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_L2_NoiseComparison_1443956288vs1445199479-1200.pdf
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGL2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_L2_1443956288vs1445199479-1200.mat
Data:
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGL2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSITMY_L2_1443956288_1200.mat
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGL2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSITMY_L2_1445199479_1200.mat
r12825

ETMX
L2
Results:
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGL2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_L2_NoiseComparison_1442915673vs1445261656-1200.pdf
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGL2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_L2_1442915673vs1445261656-1200.mat
Data:
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGL2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMX_L2_1442915673_1200.mat
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGL2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMX_L2_1445261656_1200.mat
r12826

ETMY
L2
* Since the satamp swapped in on 10/14 had issues and had to be swapped out on 10/24 for another modified satamp (87722), the 'after' time is with the working modified satamp
Results:
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGL2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_L2_NoiseComparison_1442915673vs1445434776-1200.pdf
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGL2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_L2_1442915673vs1445434776-1200.mat
Data:
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGL2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_L2_1442915673_1200.mat
$sussvn/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGL2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_L2_1445434776_1200.mat
r12827

MC1 
M2
Results:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M2_NoiseComparison_1442005989vs1449002022-720.pdf
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M2_1442005989vs1449002022-720.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC1_M2_1442005989_720.mat
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC1_M2_1449002022_720.mat
r12828
M3
Results:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M3_NoiseComparison_1442005989vs1449002022-720.pdf
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M3_1442005989vs1449002022-720.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC1_M3_1442005989_720.mat
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC1_M3_1449002022_720.mat
r12829

MC2
M2
Results:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC2_M2_NoiseComparison_1442007133vs1449002143-540.pdf
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC2_M2_1442007133vs1449002143-540.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC2_M2_1442007133_540.mat
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC2_M2_1449002143_540.mat
r12833
M3
Results:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC2_M3_NoiseComparison_1442007133vs1449002143-540.pdf
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC2_M3_1442007133vs1449002143-540.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC2_M3_1442007133_540.mat
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC2_M3_1449002143_540.mat
r12834

MC3
M2
Results:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M2_NoiseComparison_1442005989vs1449002022-720.pdf
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M2_1442005989vs1449002022-720.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC3_M2_1442005989_720.mat
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC3_M2_1449002022_720.mat
r12830
M3
Results:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M3_NoiseComparison_1442005989vs1449002022-720.pdf
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M3_1442005989vs1449002022-720.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC3_M3_1442005989_720.mat
$sussvn/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC3_M3_1449002022_720.mat
r12831

PR3
* Not really important for these lower stages, but still wanted to note that the state of the estimator was that during the before time, P and Y were on, and and during the after time, only Y was on, and these times weren't during any of the times were we were seeing issues with the estimator damping.
M2
Results:
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M2_NoiseComparison_1444913610vs1445321359-1200.pdf
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M2_1444913610vs1445321359-1200.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPR3_M2_1444913610_1200.mat
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPR3_M2_1445321359_1200.mat
r12836
M3
Results:
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M3_NoiseComparison_1444913610vs1445321359-1200.pdf
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M3_1444913610vs1445321359-1200.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPR3_M3_1444913610_1200.mat
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPR3_M3_1445321359_1200.mat
r12835

SR3
M2
* This comparison is useless because there seems to have been something wrong with the 'old' satamp, S1100105. See 88706 for more info
Results:
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR3_M2_NoiseComparison_1443025894vs1445809419-1200.pdf
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR3_M2_1443025894vs1445809419-1200.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSR3_M2_1443025894_1200.mat
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSR3_M2_1445809419_1200.mat
r12839
M3
* Not really important for these lower stages, but still wanted to note that for the before time, no estimators were on, and during the after time, only the Y estimator was on
Results:
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR3_M3_NoiseComparison_1443025894vs1445565979-1200.pdf
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR3_M3_1443025894vs1445565979-1200.mat
Data:
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSR3_M3_1443025894_1200.mat
$sussvn/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSR3_M3_1445565979_1200.mat
r12837

Ops Day Shift Summary

TITLE: 01/08 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY: More progress today on HAM7 beam alignment and with JAC install in HAM1, which is now in-place on the ISI.
LOG:

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
17:16	SAF	LASER HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA IS LASER HAZARD	Ongoing
17:39	JAC	Rahul	LVEA	Y	JAC installation	20:32
17:47	FAC	Kim	MX	N	Technical cleaning	18:29
17:48	JAC	Masayuki	LVEA/Opt Lab	Y	JAC installation	20:32
17:54	JAC	Jennie	LVEA	Y	JAC installation	18:48
17:57	JAC	Jason	LVEA	Y	JAC installation	20:32
18:26	JAC	Betsy	LVEA	-	Check in with JAC team	19:26
18:00	VAC	Norco	MX	N	LN2 fill	18:52
18:32	JAC	Kar Meng	Opt Lab	N	Looking for parts	18:35
18:35	SAF	Richard	LVEA	-	Safety checks	18:48
18:41	VAC	MikeL, MikeZ, Dolly, Lorna, others	LVEA	-	LVEA tour	19:39
18:47	SEI	Jim	EX, EY	N	Wind fence inspections	20:00
18:57	JAC	Jennie	LVEA	Y	JAC installation	20:32
21:39	CDS	Fil, Marc	LVEA	-	HAM1 cabling planning	22:16
22:07	JAC	Jennie, Jason, Masayuki	LVEA	Y	JAC installation	00:27
22:29	JAC	Betsy	LVEA	Y	JAC installation	23:29
22:29	SQZ	Kar Meng	LVEA	Y	HAM7 SQZ alignment	00:04
22:31	SQZ	Sheila, Elenna	LVEA	Y	HAM7 SQZ alignment	00:03
22:35	JAC	Rahul	LVEA	Y	JAC installation	00:27
22:36	JAC	Rick	LVEA	-	JAC installation checkin	23:36
23:06	VAC	Jordan	LVEA	-	Looking for parts	23:19
23:41	SAF	Richard	LVEA	-	Safety checks	00:00

OPO transmission clipping hunt continued...

[Sheila, Elenna, Karmeng]

Measured optical power (with power meter) of 0.89~0.9mW out of the OPO, 0.89~0.9mW after the first transmission through SFI1, 0.85mW (roughly 4.5%) after the reflection off filter cavity, and 0.84~0.85mW on SQZT7 first periscope.

We placed a photodiode right after second periscope on SQZT7 for diagnostic purpose.

 

UK 4CH satamp (currently a spare, previously on SR3 M2) noisy

Jeff, Oli

I think there is an issue with satamp S1100105, which was taken out from SR3 M2 back in October as part of our whitening filter upgrade satamp swaps (87620). I've put together some plots to show what the noise looked like on SR3 M2 before and after S1100105 was swapped out for an upgraded satamp (pdf). You can see in the Old plots that below 1 Hz there is a lot of noise that gradually slopes down; Jeff mentioned that it looks like a noise floor.

I found this out as I was making satamp swap comparison plots and found that no matter what time I chose as my 'before' time, the noise at lower frequencies was always very high, even after removing the coherent seismic noise.
I looked through many channels in ndscope and tried to find any differences between the before and after times that could possibly explain this noise but found nothing.
I have informed Fil and Marc and they will be testing the satamp.

January 2026 Wind Fence Inspection

First fence inspection of the year. Repairs from 2 weeks ago at EY seem to be holding up. EX doesn't show any new damage. 

Wed CP1 Fill

Wed Jan 07 10:04:55 2026 INFO: Fill completed in 4min 52secs

 

JAC input periscope and JM1 installation

[Jennie, Jason, Rahul, Betsy, Masayuki]

Betsy monitored the particle count throughout the work, and it remained below 20 at all times.

Summary:

The input periscope was installed and aligned. Minor First Contact issues on the top mirror required a mirror swap with the output periscope, after which installation proceeded smoothly. The periscope height and rotation were adjusted to center the beam on both mirrors and meet the 90° ± 5° rotation requirement with sufficient margin. JM1 was subsequently installed using target irises.

Work Details

• Aligned the beam to the HAM1 irises. The bottom mirror of the periscope was used to align the first iris, and the top mirror was used for the second iris. Initially, the beam was hitting the left edge of the iris; after several iterations of beam walking, both irises were well aligned.

• During removal of the first First Contact (FC) on the top mirror of the periscope, we found a small piece of FC residue remaining on the mirror surface. We attempted to remove it by scrubbing, but it could not be removed. Therefore, we decided to reapply FC to this mirror. The periscope was removed from the chamber and placed on a clean tray. Jennie and Betsy applied FC to the HR surface of the top mirror. The second FC attempt was also unsuccessful, so to continue the work without waiting for FC drying, we decided to swap this mirror with the top mirror from the output periscope, which will be installed later. The mirror taken from the output periscope was successfully cleaned, and the FC peeled off properly.

• At the time of the first FC attempt, the target irises for periscope alignment were placed. The first picture shows the two target irises. Each iris was aligned to the corresponding hole line. I measured the distance from the hole line as shown in the second and third pictures. The iris was placed approximately three-quarters of the way from the hole line. (In one of the pictures, the hole is difficult to see, but it is located beneath the 4-inch tick mark on the ruler.) Before placing these irises in the HAM1, the height was also adjsuted with rulere to 4".

• After positioning the periscope at its nominal designed location, we found that adjustment of the top mirror height was required. The periscope includes a vertical slot to accommodate different beam heights from the PSL at the two sites. The top mirror was moved to the highest position within the slot, which provided the best alignment for the beam to hit the center of both mirrors.

• The output beam from the periscope was aligned by translating and rotating the periscope body itself. The rotation angle needed to be 90 degrees within a tolerance of ±5 degrees. As discussed below, this requirement was satisfied with margin.

• The top mirror of the output periscope was also hung in the same manner as the input periscope, providing an appropriate output beam height.

• After completing the periscope installation, JM1 was installed. Target irises were again used for alignment, and JM1 was positioned using these references. Details of this installation will be reported separately by Rahul.

 

Rotation angle discussion

• The beam line from the PSL was projected onto the ISI table by measuring the iris positions that were placed at the beginning of this installation period (see earlier alog). The first iris (closer to the PSL) was positioned 1-3/8″ from the −Y hole line, while the second iris was 1-5/16″ from the same reference. The two irises are separated by approximately 48″, indicating that the beam has an angle toward the −Y direction of (1/16) / 48 = 0.0013 rad.

• The beam from the periscope was aligned using two irises separated by 20″. Assuming the irises are parallel to the hole line and that the alignment accuracy is limited by the iris aperture size (~1 mm), the beam is parallel to the hole line within 1mm / 20″ = 0.0019 rad

• Combining these effects, the total error of the rotation angle of the beam about the z-axis is less than 5 mrad even in the worst-case scenario. The requirement for this rotation angle is 90 degrees ± 5 degrees (±87 mrad), so the alignment meets the requirement with a safety margin of approximately a factor of 10.

 

Ops Day Shift Start

TITLE: 01/07 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: 22mph Gusts, 11mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.06 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.60 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY: HAM7 beam alignment and HAM1 JAC install work continues today. Quite windy overnight.

IR aligned to new OPO, working on alignment to irises and apertures

Sheila, Kar Meng, Elenna

Using the new dither lock settings from yesterday, 88686, we were able to see this morning that we were aligning to a higher order mode with two nodes displaced vertically from each other.  We had aligned one of the nodes to reach the IR PD on SQZT7 before the holidays, the other node and the location where you would expect the 00 mode to be were clipping on the way to the PD, which is why we were having a hard time alignnig IR to the OPO using that PD.  With the dither lock on the higher order mode, we adjusted the alignment between the OPO and SFI1 TPF using A:M1 and A:M2 (page 9), so that the mode was roughly centered on our irises and still reaching SQZT7.  

We were able to iteratively improve the alignment of the seed into the OPO by manually finding resonances to set the dither lock to, once we locked to a 10/01 mode we were able to improve the alignment to the IR PD on SQZT7, which then made it easier to improve the seed alignment into the OPO so that we could lock on the 00 mode, realign to the irises using A:M1 and A:M2.  Finally we fine adjusted the seed alignment into the OPO with the cavity scanning.  

Now we can easily dither lock the OPO on the 00 mode, it's quite stable, and with the cleanroom lights off we can easily see this beam on the irises in HAM7 (and SQZT7).  We attempted to align the sqz beam using only A:M1 and A:M2, but these are so degenerate that it seems rather difficult to do.  Betsy loaned us a class B knob small enough to reach the tricky yaw actuator on A:M2, but we still found this difficult.

We decided to set A:M1 and A:M2 so that the seed beam transmitted by the OPO hits our irises after ZM1 and ZM3 and returns through SFI1 toward the B path without clipping, which should set the AOI on SFI1's TFP close to what it was before the cavity swap.  Our plan is to then adjust B:M1 and B:M4 to hit the iris on ZM4 and SQZT7.  For some alignments we are clipping on the aperture attached to A:L2, for others we are clipping on SF2.  We stopped for the day after switching back and forth between these two a couple of times, we have reduced the amount of clipping but still see that we are not well aligned.  

OPS Tuesday Day shift summary

TITLE: 01/07 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY: HAMs 7 and 1 work continued today, HAM1 crew is still out at the chamber as of 00:30UTC.
LOG:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
17:16	HAZ	LASER HAZARD	LVEA	Y	LVEA IS LASER HAZARD	01:35
15:38	FAC	Nellie	Optics lab	LOCAL	Tech clean	16:00
16:08	FAC	Kim, Nellie	LVEA	Y	Tech clean	17:36
16:41	SQZ	Sheila	LVEA	Y	HAM7 work	19:45
17:01	FAC	Chris+contractors	LVEA	Y	Pest controls	17:11
17:12	FAC	Chris+contractors	Ends, Y then X	N	Pest control	18:11
17:33	SQZ	Elenna	LVEA	Y	Join HAM7 work	19:44
17:36	VAC	Travis, Jordan	LVEA HAM1	Y	Add Septum viewport covers	18:11
17:40	PSL	Jason	PSL enc / LVEA	Y	Laser diode centering	19:57
17:43	sQZ	Karmeng	SQZt0	yes	Helping Sheila on the SQZr table	19:44
17:58	FAC	Nellie	EndY	N	Tech clean, garb restock	18:52
17:58	FAC	Kim	EndX	N	Tech clean, garb restock	18:25
18:12	FAC	Chris	LVEA	Y	FAMIS tasks	18:32
18:14	ISC	Betsy, Jennie, Masayuki	LVEA	Y	HAM1, Betsy out 18:26 UTC	20:02
18:20	PSL	RyanS	LVEA	Y	Lock PSL rotation stage	18:27
18:24	VAC	Travis	HAM1	Y	Grab phone	18:27
18:25	FAC	Kim	FCES / HAM SHAQ	N	Tech clean	18:53
18:33	FAC	Chris	Out buildings	N	Checks	20:45
18:58	ISC	Betsy	LVEA	HAM1	Join JAC crew	19:59
19:58	CAL	Tony	PCAL lab	LOCAL	Open apeture and start a meas	20:15
21:10	SQZ	Sheila, Kar Meng, Elenna	LVEA	Y	HAM7 chamber work	00:08
21:25	SEI	Jim	LVEA	Y	Move hardware around HAM1	21:32
21:29	ISC	Rahul, Masayuki, Jennie, Jason	LVEA	Y	HAM1 JAC work, pop into optics lab as well	Ongoing
22:02	VAC	Jordan	LVEA	Y	Help strap down a compressed gas cylinder by HAM1	22:21
22:38	CAL	Tony	LVEA/Optics lab	Y/LOCAL	Get optics case and lens wipes for HAM1 crew	23:04
23:11	ISC	Betsy	LVEA	Y	Join HAM1 crew	23:18
23:54	ISC	Betsy	LVEA	Y	Bring parts	00:27
00:10	VAC	Travis	LVEA	Y	Take a look around HAM1	00:17

17:47 UTC HAM1 ISI WD trip (left tripped)