Fri Sep 05 10:07:53 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 7min 49secs
Jordan confirmed a good fill curbside.
Last checked in alog86131, Closes FAMIS26629
T240
2025-09-05 10:00:43.259660
There are 13 T240 proof masses out of range (> 0.3 [V])!:
ETMX T240 2 DOF X/U = -1.516 [V]
ETMX T240 2 DOF Y/V = -1.399 [V]
ETMX T240 2 DOF Z/W = -1.032 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF X/U = -2.131 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.423 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF X/U = -2.257 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF X/U = -1.041 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF Z/W = -2.686 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF Y/V = -0.376 [V]
BS T240 3 DOF Y/V = -0.302 [V]
BS T240 3 DOF Z/W = -0.461 [V]
HAM8 1 DOF Y/V = -0.546 [V]
HAM8 1 DOF Z/W = -0.881 [V]
All other proof masses are within range ( < 0.3 [V] ):
ETMX T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.118 [V]
ETMX T240 1 DOF Y/V = -0.145 [V]
ETMX T240 1 DOF Z/W = -0.177 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF X/U = -0.113 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF Y/V = -0.182 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF Z/W = -0.132 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.028 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.119 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.164 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF X/U = -0.114 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.163 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.005 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF X/U = 0.172 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF Y/V = -0.009 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF Z/W = 0.082 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.214 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.131 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.223 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.183 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF Y/V = 0.074 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF Z/W = 0.094 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF X/U = 0.023 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.082 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF Z/W = -0.036 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.017 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.215 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.066 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF Y/V = 0.029 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.093 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.131 [V]
BS T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.043 [V]
BS T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.131 [V]
BS T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.009 [V]
BS T240 3 DOF X/U = -0.194 [V]
HAM8 1 DOF X/U = -0.206 [V]
STS
2025-09-05 10:05:11.268277
There are 2 STS proof masses out of range (> 2.0 [V])!:
STS EY DOF X/U = -4.636 [V]
STS EY DOF Z/W = 2.288 [V]
All other proof masses are within range ( < 2.0 [V] ):
STS A DOF X/U = -0.462 [V]
STS A DOF Y/V = -0.819 [V]
STS A DOF Z/W = -0.56 [V]
STS B DOF X/U = 0.186 [V]
STS B DOF Y/V = 0.945 [V]
STS B DOF Z/W = -0.401 [V]
STS C DOF X/U = -0.703 [V]
STS C DOF Y/V = 0.763 [V]
STS C DOF Z/W = 0.543 [V]
STS EX DOF X/U = -0.193 [V]
STS EX DOF Y/V = -0.132 [V]
STS EX DOF Z/W = 0.048 [V]
STS EY DOF Y/V = 1.233 [V]
STS FC DOF X/U = 0.199 [V]
STS FC DOF Y/V = -1.141 [V]
STS FC DOF Z/W = 0.596 [V
After seeing that I made mistakes in the past by only running just the T240s or just the STSs, I made a bash script to run them both in their own xterm window, then once they're done all the ouput is printed in the xterm window and copied to the clipboard to be pasted to the alog.
The new button on the WEEKLIES.adl medm is labeled "! STS & T240 Centering"
Last checked in alog86613, Closes FAMIS 26660
Laser Status:
NPRO output power is 1.866W
AMP1 output power is 69.79W
AMP2 output power is 140.3W
NPRO watchdog is GREEN
AMP1 watchdog is GREEN
AMP2 watchdog is GREEN
PDWD watchdog is GREEN
PMC:
It has been locked 24 days, 0 hr 16 minutes
Reflected power = 23.77W
Transmitted power = 105.6W
PowerSum = 129.4W
FSS:
It has been locked for 0 days 0 hr and 17 min
TPD[V] = 0.7779V
ISS:
The diffracted power is around 3.7%
Last saturation event was 0 days 2 hours and 49 minutes ago
Possible Issues:
PMC reflected power is high
TITLE: 09/05 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Aligning
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 4mph Gusts, 3mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
17:36 UTC Observing
TITLE: 09/05 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Oli
SHIFT SUMMARY: Mostly quiet shift with one lock acquisition early on and observing since. H1 has now been locked for 4 hours.
LOG:
H1 is back to observing as of 00:55 UTC after a day of commissioning and a lockloss late this afternoon.
After running an alignment, DRMI locked easily, but DRMI ASC pulled things away from good alignment and there was a lockloss during DHARD_WFS. The next attempt needed a run through PRMI, which caught and PRMI ASC worked well. No other issues during the locking process. The only SDF diff I needed to address was the SQZT0 picomotor driver was left on (and is now off).
Yesterday during commissioning, I did some injections on the HAM1 ISI to try to measure the coupling of table motion at that chamber to DARM. Consistent with the multiple logs Elenna has put in the last few days, I don't see much evidence for coupling above 10hz. First 4 attached images show results for the X, Z, RY and RZ dofs. I didn't do Y or RX, I suspect from these results there's not a lot of reason to pursue those, but the each measurement is only 90s and are relatively low risk.
For each injection, I sent a bandpassed (butter("BandPass",8,10,100) in diaggui) the input of the iso loops, with amplitudes between 2 and 4 (I think 4 would have been fine for all dofs, as far as the IFO was concerned). I then made dtt templates for each excitation dof with spectra for the relevant BLND GS13 dof and CAL_DELTAL, put those filenames and locations in the coupling_plot.py and used the coupling_util.py function attached here, as well as the darm calibration txt. I'm sure these exist somewhere in the svn or something (couldn't find them) but it's taken several days to get this sorted on my own and want half a chance of figuring it out again in the future. I got some help from Huyen, but also used some older copies I had from previous measurements.
TITLE: 09/04 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY:
For today...we only observed for 15min--rest of the day was for commissioning (1445 until past 0000utc when H1 gets back to NLN); the 42hr lock ended right after Commissioning started. (apologies for handing you an unlocked H1, RyanS....but did get to do some locking for the first time in weeks (due to long H1 locks)!).
LOG:
TITLE: 09/04 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Commissioning
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: SEISMON_ALERT
Wind: 10mph Gusts, 5mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: H1 has been commissioning pretty much all day, but just had a lockloss at 22:51. H1 is starting an initial alignment now.
This morning at 16:03UTC, Corey heated up OM2 by setting H1:AWC-OM2_TSAMS_POWER_SET to 4.6, plot attached.
I switched off the heater by changing H1:AWC-OM2_TSAMS_POWER_SET back to 0 count at 21:59:37 UTC.
Attached is a plot showing the two thermistors on the OM2 heater (top plots) and kappa C on the bottom right to monitor the optical gain (while doing the darm offset step or before we get to NLN this value is flat as the PCAL line that is used in the calculation is not at its nominal settings).
At 22:00 UTC, Jennie turned this OM2 heater back off.
We plan to stay in commissioning until 23:00UTC to avoid contaminating Observing data with the 78618 "bike chain" glitches from OM2 slipping.
Sheila, Camilla
Camilla then noticed that my angle tuning for FDS above wasn't very good, so she repeated that. 86737
camilla.compton/Documents/sqz/templates/dtt/20250904_SRCLSQZdata.xml
and
attached.Type | Time (UTC) | SRCL Offset | Angle | DTT Ref |
FIS SQZ | 21:09:30 - 21:12:30 | -382 | (-)125.4 | ref 1 |
FIS SQZ | 21:14:45 - 21:17:45 | -200 | (-)151.0 | ref 2 |
FIS SQZ | 21:19:30 - 21:22:30 | 0 | (-)211.7 | ref 3 |
Took above data at NLG of 24.0, measaured a few hours ago 86729.
Type | Time (UTC) | SRCL Offset | Angle | DTT Ref |
FIS SQZ | 21:44:00 - 21:47:00 | -235 | (-)143.4 | ref 4 |
FIS Mid + SQZ (tuned to no sqz) | 21:48:00 - 21:51:00 | -235 | (-)151.0 | ref 5 |
FIS Mid - SQZ (tuned to no sqz) | 21:51:45 - 21:54:45 | -235 | (-)122.6 | ref 6 |
Mean SQZ (ADF off) | 21:56:00 - 21:59:00 | -235 | N/A | ref 7 |
I used this data and the no sqz data from here to run the so-called "brontosaurus" plot.
The results indicate that the SRCL offset is significantly decreased. The fit gives an offset of -235 ct for the hot OM2, compared to our current -382 ct offset.
at 19:25:38-19:56:30 UTC we went to no sqz with OM2 hot.
There was a 29Hz peak injected by Robert, and this was 1 hour 30 minutes after power up.
In this alog, I showed a plot that compares the CHARD P and INP1 P noise before and after the HAM1 ISI install. Last night, I took the measured CHARD P coupling function and calculated the CHARD P contribution to DARM just before the vent to install the HAM1 ISI, and from a high range time this past weekend, with the HAM1 ISI installed. The attached plot compares DARM before and after the vent and the CHARD P contribution to DARM before and after the vent.
Turns out the change in CHARD noise may have actually directly reduced some noise in DARM. The DARM/CHARD coupling function remained the same before and after the vent, so the improvement is directly due to the reduction of noise in CHARD.
We were running HAM1 feedforward to the pitch ASC before the install, but it varied in performance. My plot in the linked alog shows the best performance achieved, but looking at the data closer to the vent, the noise in CHARD P may have been higher than the best performance I show in the linked alog above.
The low frequency noise in DARM has also changed for other reasons:
Closes FAMIS#37256, last checked 86348
Things to note:
Possible issues:
CS_DUST_LAB1_{300,500}NM both stalled at a value 16 days ago
CS_DUST_DR1_300NM has been at zero for the past four days
CS_DUST_DR1_500NM has been at zero for the past six days
Not an issue:
CS_DUST_LVEA5_300NM has been at 0 for three months - since we turned it off after the vent
CS_DUST_LAB2_{300,500}NM both off as expected (comparing to last month when Ryan C didn't mention it as an issue)