Displaying reports 1-20 of 87931.Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 End
Reports until 23:33, Monday 08 June 2026
H1 AOS
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - posted 23:33, Monday 08 June 2026 (90536)
Monday afternoon HAM123: Mostly done, one mystery scattering somewhere in/on the IFI assy (Disha, Rahul, Keita)

Summary

Whatever happened to IM1, Rahul did make it better again. Reasons for improvement is unknown but we proceeded with the alignment and we're mostly done.

There is a mystery scattering or maybe clipping somewhere close to the IFI output but not on the output baffle nor DKDP baffle. It could be a scatter from the CWP surface, or a ghost beam somewhere, or something else. It will take a LONG time to diagnose this, and quite likely this existed for a long time. I'm tempted to leave it at this time. But I'll try to take some more pictures.

There's also something weird about the 1st pico mirror PIT actuator for ISS array.

We'd still like to take pictures/measurements here and there on Tuesday.

Done: ASC REFL centering

Following the morning work (alog 90525), REFL ASC censors were centered using RM1 and RM2. About ~30% of DAC range was used for RM2 (RMs_happy_again.png). FYI, using flash peak, [P,Y]=[-0.003, 0.015] for REFL_A and [-0.020, 0.001] for REFL_B. (Doesn't matter how close these are to zero as far as they're within +-0.1 or so and the SUM is decent, but it feels better to be able to get close to zero.)

Done: ISS array centering

Then we looked at the ISS array and the QPD was not centered. A quick adjustment of the second pico that is closer to the array was all it needed (keita_ISS_happy1.png). [P, Y]=[-0.03, 0.05].

Done: IFO REFL baffle (HA13) adjustment

We looked at the IFO REFL baffle (HA13) in front of the HAM2-HAM3 septum window and it was too high even though it was not clipping, so we lowered it by a couple mm. Before: lower edge height = 105.5mm; upper edge = 206.8mm. After: lower edge = 103.6mm; upper edge = 204.5mm.

This baffle was already moved by a couple mm in +Y direction last week (because the beam was closer to +Y edge). See  IFOREFL_baffle_before_relocation.jpg and IFOREFL_baffle_after_relocation.jpg though it might be difficult to see the difference from this picture.

IFO REFL beam looked like IFOREFL_HA13_baffle_after.mov after the height adjustment.

Mystery flashes seen inside IFI output baffle aperture

We proceeded to check the IFI output baffle and I was bothered to find that something that looked like clipping was visible close to the left edge of the baffle using the IR camera. See IFI_OUT_clipped_720p.mov, this is a view from +Y door. But this was less frequent than the flashing itself. In a retrospect, this was probably the reflection from the PRM when the beam was swinging to the left of the video, but anyway we did various things:

See IFI_out_another_view.mov, this is after the beam quieted down enough and after PRM PIT was changed. The bright thing at the left side of the baffle hole is not visible any more, but you can still see bright-ish scattering of some sort inside the baffle aperture which was there even when Rahul blocked the beam between PRM and IM4. IFI_out_another_view.jpg shows the same thing but with more useful exposure. This is concerning.

DKDP baffle behind the IFI output cwp baffle looked OK (IFI_DKDP_baffle.mp4). BTW, as was reported before, it looked to us that the IFI output baffle has an offset in -X+Y direction relative to DKDP. In the video, the beam on DKDP is slightly biased to the right on average because we tried to split the difference between two baffles.

We moved IM1 in YAW by +-200urad while observing the IFI output by IR viewer to see if there is a better beam position on IFI output. It seemed to me that actually we don't have much space here.

Look at IFI.png to see how the beam is routed through DKDP, output CWP and then passes by the parking beam dump pick-off.

We'll be better once we're in vacuum because things will be quieter and the MC alignment will be better, so no beam motion and no HOM transmission, but I have to say that the clearance here looks to be unnecessarily narrow. I will NOT touch IFI itself so the only option for mitigation will be to move the parking BD pickoff, but it will be tedious to align that pickoff to steer the beam into the beam dump on top of HAM2. Given the limited time available I'll leave it as is.

We don't know what this scattering is, maybe it's the AR reflection of CWP or DKDP hitting something, maybe it's the surface scatter of CWP. I'll try to take the video from the back of the IFI output beamdump/CWP using a big inspection mirror.

Done: IM4 TRANS centering.

Rahul used pico mirror to roughly center IM4 TRANS while I was monitoring individual segments.

Done: IM4 baffle (HA12) moved

As planned. The beam originally was offset in +X direction (IM4_baffle_HA12_before.mov), IM4 baffle was moved a bit in -X direction (IM4_baffle_HA12_after.mov).

Done but not really: Picturing the picos, one concern for the first ISS pico actuator.

We took three pictures (ISS_1st_pico.jpegISS_2nd_pico.jpeg and  IM4_TRANS_pico.jpeg) but they're not great, the 2nd pico for ISS and the pico for IM4 TRANS don't show how much thread is left for the YAW actuator at all.
The 1st ISS pico is concerning in that the PIT actuator might have lost the ball tip or the stop ring got loose. Will investigate further tomorrow.
Images attached to this report
Non-image files attached to this report
H1 SUS
betsy.weaver@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:41, Monday 08 June 2026 (90537)
BSC2 BBSS Work today

Today:

 

Up next:

Start HEPI spring loading, recheck FARO shots, move per what FARO says we need to move

Suspend the BBSS, take Top TFs, then work on M2 and M3 stage OSEMs.

 

H1 CDS (OpsInfo, SPI)
jennifer.wright@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:40, Monday 08 June 2026 (90535)
Pairing bluetooth headphones for in-chamber work

Erik V, Jennie W, Tony S

Summary: Jeff and I need a solution for SPI installation in order to communicate offsite to team members about alignment. Erik and Tony found a solution using the Blueman application. Just now we have this working on 

 

  1. Use the application called 'blueman' on linux (check blueman installed first). Tony is installing this via puppet so it should propagate to all workstations and laptops.
  2. Once installed there should be a bluetooth icon in the taskbar on the top right.
  3. Right click on this and click 'Turn Bluetooth On'.
  4. Then click on 'Make Discoverable'.
  5. Click on 'Set Up New Device' on the same menu.
  6. In the Pop-up menu find your headphones in the drop-down menu and follow the steps to pair your device while pressing pair on headphones.
  7. 'Make Discoverable' may timeout so you need to repeat from step 4.
  8. At some point a pop will appear asking for authorisation for the new device, click 'Accept'.

 

LHO General
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:30, Monday 08 June 2026 (90521)
Mon Day Ops Summary

TITLE: 06/08 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:

ISS PD Array alignment continued, ITMy First Contact prep (for 3hr First-Contact-ing tomorrow), some FARO work for BBSS, cabling in BSC2, etc.
LOG:

H1 SPI (CDS)
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - posted 15:11, Monday 08 June 2026 - last comment - 15:19, Monday 08 June 2026(90529)
2026-06-08 SPI Pathfinder Update: HAM3 In-air PD and Pico Cables Landed, Optical Fiber Patchcords Protected and Routed
J. Kissel, F. Clara
WP:13296

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Executive Summary: 
Following up after last week's completion of SUS-R2 (LHO:90500), all HAM3 in-air electronics cables and optical fiber patch cords to/from SUS-R2 or TCSY to the chamber have been "pulled," i.e. routed fully to each end of their connections. This leaves *only* the HAM2 ISIJ QPD connection to its transimpedance amplifier in SUS-R1 as the last cable to be landed in the ex-vacuo part of the SPI electronics wiring and optical fiber network.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Details
Here's the status summary of each of the HAM3 cables and patch cords Fil and I pulled today.

SPI Picomotor Cable SPI_HAM3_013
Description :: This cable connects drive CHs 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the TCSY / CO2Y Picomotor Controller "G" (driven by Corner 2 ECAT Chassis) to the HAM3 D6 12x D25 feedthru into port F11. 

Status :: Now connected at controller and at flange. Strain relief at flange is not yet final.

SPI PD Concentrator Cable SPI_HAM3_015
Description :: This cable bus routes the SPI HAM3 ISIK Transceiver PD and QPD signals (IFO_REF_A, IFO_REF_B, IFO_MEAS_A, FBR_PWRIN_REF, FBR_PWRIN_MEAS, IFO_MEAS_B, QPDB_Q1, QPDB_Q2, QPDB_Q3, QPDB_Q4) from HAM3 D6 port F10 to the "PD Input" port of the S2500712 D1002481-v4 "Variant 2" of the SPI transimpedance amplifier (TIA) chassis in SUS-R2 U4. 

Status :: Now connected at TIA and at flange. Strain relief at flange is not yet final.

SPI_PSL_001 Optical Fiber Patch Cord
Description :: This optical fiber patch cord connects the fiber collimator SPI-FC1 fiber output of the SPI Pick-off Path in the PSL to the "PSL IN" fiber input port on the front-panel of S2500058 D2400156 SPI Laser Prep Chassis in SUS-R2 U6+U7.

Status :: NOT ENERGIZED (thanks to newly installed Uniblitz Shutter; LHO:90490). BUT -- shielded with standard orange protective tubing and now brought down from the cable tray (2nd story of "high" tray running above the input arm) and landed at the Laser Prep Chassis. Neither strain relief nor routing through rack is final.

SPI_REF_001 and SPI_MEAS_001 Optical Fiber Patch Cords
Description :: This pair of optical fiber patch cords connect the modulated at 80.0 MHz [MEAS] and (80.0 MHz - 4096 Hz) = 79.995904 MHz = "80- MHz" [REF] light from the SUS-R2 U6+7 Laser Prep Chassis fiber output ports to the HAM3 D4-1J1 [S3228003 MEAS] and D4-1J2 [S3228002 REF] fiber feedthrus (D2500175).

Status :: NOT ENERGIZED (no laser input from PSL, nor are the AOMs being driven with any RF). BUT -- shielded with standard orange protective tubing and routed in the "low" cable tray system that runs from SUS-R2 to the feedthrus underneath the -X side of the chamber. They're connected at the SUS-R2 U6+7 Laser Prep Chassis fiber output ports, but they're dangling at the feedthru end because we haven't finished upgrading the feedthrus (see LHO:90511).

References
The SPI Pathfinder has been integrated into lots of different subsystems, so there's a ton of disparate systems drawings that are need to follow its signals from "soup to nuts."

Optical Fiber
[1] D1300348 As-built PSL/IO Table Layout
[2] D2400110 Optical Fiber Routing Diagram

RF electronics and PD Electronics
[3] D2400111 SPI Wiring Diagram
[4] D1002874 HAM3 Flange Layout
[5] G2401479 Systems-level Slides for HAM3D4_12xD25 and HAM3D6_FiberFeedthru plans
[6] SUS-R2 Rack Layout w.r.t. SPI
[7] E1100591 (Heliax) RF Signal Distribution System

Picomotor Drive
[8] E1100892 TCS Wiring Diagram
[9] D1900511 ISC Wiring Diagram
[10] D1100683 EtherCAT (Beckhoff) System Diagram
[11] E1200072 Picomotor Channel Inventory [[Very-out-of-date -- see unresolved IIET:32610]]
Comments related to this report
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 15:16, Monday 08 June 2026 (90532)
Pictures of SPI Picomotor Cable SPI_HAM3_013
Images attached to this comment
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 15:17, Monday 08 June 2026 (90533)
Pictures of SPI PD Concentrator Cable SPI_HAM3_015.
Images attached to this comment
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 15:19, Monday 08 June 2026 (90534)
Pictures of SPI_PSL_001 Optical Fiber Patch Cord, SPI_REF_001 and SPI_MEAS_001 Optical Fiber Patch Cords
Images attached to this comment
H1 SQZ
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:23, Monday 08 June 2026 (90528)
HAM7 Vent - Monday 8th June

Shiela, Begum, Camilla

Starting at FC alignment from Friday, 90527.

Tried to make the beam the correct ~5.5” height at ZM2 with A:M1 and then use ZM2 to get correct height at ZM3 (~6.25") but ZM2 did not have enough range. We railed it by only going halfway. Instead, we used A:M3 for beam height at ZM3 and then ZM3 for retroreflected beam. Did this only in PITCH (used YAW offset to help check retro-refection). Took height measurements (~6.25" at FC1 and  ZM3, 5.85") This is not perfect at ZM2 but we'll check for any astigmatism when beam profiling. Attached alignments

Tried to use B:M1 and BM4 to realign to ZM4 iris. However, beam could not be near centered on B:L1 aperture and fully transmit SFI2 (was a clipped after SFI2).

Realized beam height wasn’t level after OPO. High at A:L1 and low at A:DC2. We then used A:M1 pitch to center art A:L1 and then SFI1 aperture. And A:M2 to center on A:L2 aperture. We again checked if we could now get the correct height at ZM2 without railing ZM2 to get bean to ZM3, no. So adjusted A:M3 in PIT. After this was done, we realized PIT and YAW must be cross coupled as the beam was yaw'ed towards +X at the ZM3 iris. Paused. 

 

 

 

Images attached to this report
H1 COC (COC, SUS, SYS)
anamaria.effler@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:30, Monday 08 June 2026 (90526)
ITMY First Contact prep

Ibrahim, Anamaria

This morning we:
-  set up the FC fabric on the drum;
- lowered the ITMX ACB to take its wedge, and then used it to swing the ITMY ACB out of the way;
- inserted the peek "Kurt fingers" between ITMY and its CP in preparation for installing the FC jig this afternoon.

This afternoon we:
- set up the jig around the test mass;
- tightened the drum with the fabric onto the test mass while watching the fibers on camera;
- added the grid+mesh for pressing, as well as picos on the ring of the drum;
- added the funnel and hose setup, connected to the spigot.

We will add more details and photos later. For now we are dumping photos in the common FC google drive. Folders named by date and activity.

H1 ISC (IOO, ISC, SUS)
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:30, Monday 08 June 2026 (90525)
Rahul inspected IM1 LL OSEM in chamber, nothing wrong, installed it back and suddenly we got the beam back on ISS array

First attachment shows that the ISS array PDs suddenly lost the beam (bottom left) right after the IM1 LL OSEM jumped (top left) on Friday, meaning that the problem was not just the OSEM sensing, somehow the alignment was affected by this.

This morning Rahul physically inspected IM1 and checked  cables and electronics but nothing was wrong. He pulled the LL OSEM and nothing was wrong either. He put it back on, centered the OSEM depth (only for LL) and everything looked normal.

We locked JAC and suddenly we got the flashes on ISS array back, see the second attachment.

Though this is good, it's also frustrating that we don't understand what happened. My theory is that somehow something (OSEM bobbin thing?) was charged and pulled the closest metal electrostatically, changing the DC alignment.

We'll  see if we can center REFL ASC sensors as well as ISS QPD. If we can, we'll proceed to close out.

FYI, following is the IM1 OSEMINF before the jump, right after the jump and now. UR experienced 500 counts jump and clearly got back after Rahul's job. Changes for UL and LR were much smaller but they got closer to the pre-jump position, too. Don't pay much attention to the 1000 counts difference for  LL now VS pre-jump because it was reset. 

  Before the jump on Friday After the jump on Friday After Rahul reset the OSEM
UL 16647 16577 16695
LL 9032 2492 10709
UR 14790 15292 14798
LR 7154 7022 7169

 

Images attached to this report
LHO General
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 07:43, Monday 08 June 2026 (90520)
Mon Day Ops Transition

TITLE: 06/08 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: 3mph Gusts, 1mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.04 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

Lots of items today:  Continue finishing up ISS PD Array aligningment (then ground loop checks?), HAM3 SPI cabling/flange work + SPI main install, FARO for BBSS around HAM3, ITMy First Contact in-situ, HAM7 in-chamber.

Big M7.8 EQ ~15hrs ago (nothing tripped...although we have lots of SEI +SUS down for in-chamber work).

CEBEX crew continues laying brick (seeing about wall of 5-7 brick high this morning).

LHO General (SEI)
alexandra.mitchell@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:34, Saturday 06 June 2026 - last comment - 10:36, Monday 08 June 2026(90519)
HAM3 CRS assembly complete
Friday June 5th we completed the assembly for the CRS that is going in HAM3. 

First thing we checked the alignment of the HoQIs, Fringe visibility: SN005 86% SN007 85%

We swapped out the photodiodes and cables in SN007 due to damage in one of the cables which meant the wire was exposed risking grounding issues should this touch any of the metal parts. The fringe visibility after this was at 72%. 

The HoQIs were completed with the baffles and top cover. SN007 cover is incorrect and the correct parts were not out of C&B so the wrong cover is on it at the moment this will be switched when we have the clean part. 

They were fixed to the CRS and aligned to it. SN007 is on the right and SN005 is on the left. Fringe visibility with the CRS fixed was as follows
SN007 sin 82% cos 80% mcos 82% SN 005 sin 83% cos 75% mcos 83%
The CRS was released and the fringe visibility for both left and right was checked, they were >80%, not all PDs were recorded but eg SN007 mcos was 82% 

Comments related to this report
alexandra.mitchell@LIGO.ORG - 10:36, Monday 08 June 2026 (90523)
Adding photos 
Images attached to this comment
LHO VE (VE)
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:24, Saturday 06 June 2026 (90518)
Purge Air Compressor Oil Pump Replacement

(Gerardo M., Brandon P. (RMC Tech), Jordan V. (buddy))

Today the second oil pump was replaced on the Kobelco unit, no issues to report.  For previous work see aLOG 90318.

The purge air was isolated at the dryer towers and at the point of delivery before starting work.  Brandon shut off the compressor and stopped the dryer system, then removed and replaced the oil pump.  Kobelco compressor was re-started, oil measured, compressor was turned off to add oil up to nominal value, then the compressor was started and load tested.  No issues noted.  Brandon handed over the system.  I started the dryer towers back up, no issues noted.  Dew point from the local reading at the towers remained below -51 oC since the dryer system remained with both towers "loaded", and since there was no demand both remained pressurized.  After an hour with both the compressor and the dryer towers running at nominal, I opened the purge air to the LVEA lines.  After 45 minutes I took a couple of measurements.

Measurement results:

  1. Point of use, near the purge port near HAM4 yielded a dew point of -43.2 oC
  2. Same as before, near the dryer towers in the mechanical room, the dew point was taken before the big pressure regulator, port for the TMDS air supply, both towers yielded -44.4 oC.

Purge air is purging into the opened volumes.  Once again, please don't waste the purge air, if you can please keep those C3 door covers closed.  Thank you!

 

Leaving site now.

Images attached to this report
H1 ISC (INS, IOO, ISC)
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - posted 20:32, Friday 05 June 2026 - last comment - 20:59, Friday 05 June 2026(90499)
Friday HAM1/2/3 alignment: Victory and Disappointment (Disha, Rahul, Jennie, Arnaud, Anamaria, Keita)

Short story:

RM2 was nicely relieved by rotating IM1 in YAW, ASC REFL sensors were centered, RM2 only used 40% of DAC range, people==happy (ASC-REFL-centered-20260605.png).

ISS QPD was nicely centered, it was easy, people==happy (iss_CENTERED.png).

Then suddenly we found that the IFO REFL beam is clipped at the bottom of the IFO REFL baffle, ISS array was totally out of whack, forward-going beam from IM2 was not centered on the retroreflection check iris between IFI input baffle and IFI HWP baffle, people!=happy.

Turns out that something bad happened to IM1 about 10 minutes after ISS was centered (IM1_bad.png). Without any change in the drive, H1:SUS-IM1_M1_OSEMINF_LL jumped by negative 172 counts causing apparent positive 1570urad jump in DAMP_P and DAMP_Y.  UR changed by 12 counts, which is like O(100urad) type change. 

This doesn't necessarily mean that IM1 moved that much, maybe one OSEM was bumped while we're trying to put the cover on the ISS, but the thing is that this must have caused physical rotation somehow because we see the beam moved downstream of IM1.

We tried to diagnose the IM1 but found no obvious touching, transfer functions didn't look wrong, EQ stops have gaps, magnets look as if they're OK.

You don't have to read further, below is our memo to remember what was done.

Details you don't want to remember:

We've made another YAW move (of positive 300urad) for IM1, i.e. [P,Y]=[517, -687] -> [517, -387] to relieve RM2 further.

Based on calculation, also moved IM2 and IM3 to roughly align things. IM2 [P,Y]=[0, -588.7] -> [0, -19] IM3 [P,Y]=[35.3, -415] -> [35.3, -86].

Checked the IFI output baffle and noticed that it seems to have an offset in -X direction relative to DKDP baffle. The beam was well centered on DKDP baffle, but was too much in +X direction on the IFI output baffle.

Moving IM2 further, [P,Y]=[35.3,  381] to split the difference.  Distance between the forward-going beam and the parking beamdump pickoff was ok.

This resulted in large IM3 Yaw step (IM3 [P, Y] = [35, 654]) to bring the beam close to the nominal position in front of PRM.  Horizontally, the beam was off by 0.5+-1mm in negative Y direction. Nominal beam height at the measurement point for PRM 159.05mm. Measured 157.1+-1mm.

IM4 Yaw moved by positive 350 ([IM4 [P,Y]=[761, -205]) to set the beam position in front of PR2. Horizontally, the beam was off by 0.5+-2mm in positive Y direction. Nominal beam height at the measurement point for PR2 168.56mm, measured 169.8+-2mm.

Centered the retro-reflection check iris to the forward-going beam between IFI input and IFI HWP baffle. Aligned PRM to center back-propagation on that iris. 

PRM [P, Y] = [-1185, -270].

Centered refl asc sensors. This worked really well, RM2 DAC was only using 40% of its range after centering ASC REFL sensors. Even though this was one attempt, I'm comfortable enough to say that we'll be fine.

Moved on to center ISS array. We removed the ISS array cover from the assembly to use the input aperture tool to make things easier. Large hole aperture as well as medium was used, didn't bother to use the small aperture. We used two pico mirrors (had to use hand because no driver is connected until the IOT2L is back). Iteration between two mirrors was easy and the centering was done by 22:37 UTC.

RM1 P, Y = -196, 209 (13% of DAC range)

RM2 P, Y = 609, -602 (40% of DAC range)

Happily we put the ISS array cover back on. Unknown to us, something happened to IM1 at around 22:46 UTC.  
 

Remaining task:

solve IM1 mystery?

shoot the pic of pico mirrors to see how much range we have.

center IM4_TRANS

take aperture photo for IFI inpjt and IM4 baffle, recenter IM4 baffle if necessary.

ground check.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
jennifer.wright@LIGO.ORG - 20:59, Friday 05 June 2026 (90517)

I post this picture showing the separate osem trends for IM1 and also the CPS Z and RX motion of the chamber. The big step in LL IM1 osem was coincidental with noise in Z and RX  of HAM2 ISI so we think it was when we were leaning into the chamber to p6ut the cover on the ISS. Later on there is a step change in the Z and RX motion, I think this was when Rahul actually stepped into chamber to screw the cover screws down. I conclude that whatever happened was when we were leaning past the IM1 from outside the chamber.

I ran the rubbing scripts from this LHO alog #77383 for IM1 but wasn't sure how to interpret the results, reference time was midnight last night. The only one that looks really different is the yaw degree of freedom.

Annamaria drove some signals through each IM1 OSEM in turn to check for rubbing.

Time of test 02:00 UTC

Response in each OSEM UL push UR push LL push LR push
UL 17.7 0.6 8 10
UR 0.4 17 10.7 7
LL 6.6 7.5 15 1
LR 11 8 1 18

We used an actuation of 60000 counts offset added ther the COILOUT filter bank. We can't see any obvious imbalance in the response of the four osems.

Annamaria also ran an undamped TF in pitch, shown here compared to a reference measurement from 2024. This doesn't really seem to show any obvious rubbing.

Summary: As Keita said above we are confused as to what exactly is wrong with IM1.

 

 

Images attached to this comment
H1 AOS (AOS, SUS, SYS)
anamaria.effler@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:15, Friday 05 June 2026 (90513)
Cage baffle install complete on ITMX

Robert, Ibrahim, Anamaria

We finished alignment of the CP cage baffle on ITMX, which was the last item to do regarding cage baffles. The panels are locked so they can now be removed and replaced while retaining the alignment. 

Both ITMs have the (new) face shield on. ITMY suspension is unlocked and ITMX is locked. 

H1 SQZ
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:05, Friday 05 June 2026 - last comment - 13:03, Monday 08 June 2026(90505)
HAM7 Vent, Day 4. Friday 5th June

Begum, Ryosuke, Camilla, Madi

Summary: Were able to retroflect the beam off FC1 (when placed at O4 sliders) with ZM2 and ZM3 but the beam height is incorrect, as expected, VOPO optics will need to be moved to fix this. 

Checking current Beam location:
Started the day by checking the beam path with our alignments as left yesterday 90467. With FC1 P slider at O4 nominal 225 (WIT at 165), we have: beam ~4mm low on ZM3 iris, 1” off FC REFL iris (beam up and right), not retroreflected ~3mm off being retro-reflected at ZM1 and 0.5mW on IR PD. I'm was little surprised that we have any light in the IR PD but this makes some sense as the beam is far from retroflected so it's going into the FC at a strange angle.  With FC1 WIT moved to 185, IR REFL got better, to 0.8mW but this doesn't mean anything so leave at original plan of  FC1P slider at 225.
 
Setting FC Retrorefection
We then got the IR beam reflected off FC by adjusting ZM2 and ZM3. I first did this by moving ZM3 for co-alignment at the ZM1 iris, then moving ZM2 to co-align at A:M3. Then noticed YAW was a little off at A:P1 so adjusted ZM2. Begum later came out with a card with a hole in it and  slightly adjusted these co-alignments by mis-aligning in pit to check yaw and vice versa. Ending screenshot attached. 
It’s now not making it through B:L1, high and slightly left (towards -X). It is low and slightly left (-X) on ZM3 iris. 
Green beam not making it to FC REFL iris LPM.
 
Beam height Measurements 
The nominal beam height between ZM3 and FC1 is 6.288"  however out beam is low, ~6". We measured it to be the same both close to ZM3 and as far towards FC1 as we could reach so it is at least retro-reflecting off FC1 horizontal, this is good. At ZM2 it was 6" and at ZM1 it was 5.5", we  expect it to be 5.532" high here (60068) and rise up between ZM2 and ZM3 but it appeared to be rising between A:M3 and ZM2. ZM1 sliders have always been 0,0. Photos of height measurements attached. 
We expect that we need to change A:M3 and other VOPO optics to get the beam both retro-reflecting off this FC1 angle with the correct beam height. 
 
End of day
We then tried to take more Phasics camera measurements but struggled with the camera connection.
We also went back to SQZT7 IR PD alignment, ready to check before the  B:L2 aperture move, but the alignment wasn't the same. This was confusing, I went back to the alignment we set the ZM1 and ZM3 iris and the alignment looked fine there and on SQZT7.  To be continued...

 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 13:03, Monday 08 June 2026 (90527)

Attached alignment for good alignment towards IFO, on ZM4 iris and SQZT7 IR PD irises. Both when OPOs is unlcoked and locked. When OPOS is locked beam doesn't go though closed irirses so isn't perfectly aligned but it is close enough. 

Our Friday's alignment for FC retrorefection (with non-ideal) beam height:

ZM1 P 0,  Y0
ZM2 P 0, Y -325
ZM3 P -275, Y -300
FC1 P 225, Y -153
Images attached to this comment
LHO VE (VE)
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - posted 19:03, Wednesday 03 June 2026 - last comment - 20:14, Friday 05 June 2026(90475)
Dew Point Measurement

(Jordan V., Gerardo M.)

We have noticed that the dew point at the dryer towers has been increasing since opening to HAM7 and or related to power glitch last Saturday, we are still looking into it.

We have had a constant dew point at the dryer towers of -72 oC, and now we are at -57 oC, because of those numbers we ran a short test, once work was finished for the day in-chamber, we stopped the purge air to the LVEA to see what the effect was on the drying tower's dew point, it changed but very slow, we started at -57 oC and after 20 minutes we ended up at -59 oC, and we noted that the right tower may be in trouble since the dew point did not improved while this tower "works", the dew point instead went up by the one degree, erasing the improvement of the left tower.  We will look more into it.

To complete the test we took a dew point measurement at the point of use in the LVEA, and we got a -40.7oC, getting close to a bad dew point, and remember this is while no in-chamber work is going on, so please mind those C3 soft covers on chamber doors, thank you.

 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - 20:14, Friday 05 June 2026 (90515)VE

Today I power cycled the dryer towers for the purge air system, I did this to shut it off in a controlled manner instead of a power glitch/outage, like the ones from last Saturday, see entry here, and then restarted the unit back up, the dew point at the dryer towers improved by 4 degrees. 

Also, I took a couple of dew point measurements at different places:

  1. Point of use, near the purge port near HAM4 yielded a dew point of -42.0 oC
  2. Near the dryer towers in the mechanical room, the dew point was taken before the big pressure regulator at the TMDS supply port, first with the left tower measured -42.1 oC, and a second reading with the right tower drying measured -42.7 oC.

In conclusion, despite the great demand of purge air, the dew point still is good, but please don't waste it, if you can please keep those C3 door covers closed.  Thank you!

Images attached to this comment
Displaying reports 1-20 of 87931.Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 End