Naoki, Camilla
We reverted PSAMS from 7.5/0.55 to 8.8/-0.67, which was done last Friday in 77133. Before and after PSAMS change, we ran SCAN_ALIGNMENT and took 5+5 min asqz/sqz data. The attached figure shows that 8.8/-0.67 is better than 7.5/0.55. In parallel, A2L tuning was ongoing so the noise below 100 Hz in SQZ should be due to A2L.
asqz 120/137 (strain voltage 7.5/0.55) (5 min)
PDT: 2024-04-18 10:59:48 PDT
UTC: 2024-04-18 17:59:48 UTC
GPS: 1397498406
sqz 120/137 (strain voltage 7.5/0.55) (5 min)
PDT: 2024-04-18 11:06:29 PDT
UTC: 2024-04-18 18:06:29 UTC
GPS: 1397498807
asqz 170/95 (strain voltage 8.8/-0.67) (5 min)
PDT: 2024-04-18 12:01:57 PDT
UTC: 2024-04-18 19:01:57 UTC
GPS: 1397502135
sqz 170/95 (strain voltage 8.8/-0.67) (5 min)
PDT: 2024-04-18 13:35:01 PDT
UTC: 2024-04-18 20:35:01 UTC
GPS: 1397507719
Thu Apr 18 10:06:27 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 6min 23secs
Jordan confirmed a good fill curbside.
TITLE: 04/18 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 117Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 7mph Gusts, 6mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.10 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
H1's had range hovering between 150-155Mpc 24hrs ago. After the EQs last night, H1 made it back UP. but seems a bit off with a range down near 110Mpc. Sheila has just walked in and mentioned Commissioning time is planned from 8-11am this morning and she is jumping in on that---so we are out of OBSERVING. Heard Sheila mentioned angular coupling and tried No Squeezing and is now looking at A2L (but we are at the very beginning of investigations and commissioning).
The togglingof No Squeezing to Freq Dep Squeezing helped with the range already. And Sheila is currently running an A2L. And it looks like L1 is also joining us with commissioning.
I accepted these P2L spot gain SDF Diffs to get into Observing.
Summary highlights of DQ shift the week from 2024-04-08 to 2024-04-14
The IFO was in observing mode for 74% avg. (lower during the first half of the week and better during the second half)
LHO was observing at a range of 158 Mpc with some dip in range to 134Mpc on the first 2 days of the week (8th and 9th).
For most of the week, whenever the IFO transitioned to observing from a lockloss, the strain h(t) showed noise in the lower frequency regions 10-50Hz and also broadband high frequency noise (above 500Hz) which reduced with time. On some days, these features lasted for more than a couple of hours.
Violin modes at 500Hz and its harmonics were strong at the beginning of observation time after lock loss but dampened after a couple of hours.
Most of the high SNR omicron glitches were centered at ~ 40Hz
The dominant channels in Hveto were usually
H1:PEM-EX_VMON_ETMX_ESDPOWER48_DQ
H1:ASC-CHARD_Y_OUT_DQ
Fscan lines have been on the higher side in the range of 600 to 700 on most days this week.
Full DQ shift report with daily observations can be found in the wiki page here: https://wiki.ligo.org/DetChar/DataQuality/DQShiftLHO20240408
TITLE: 04/18 Owl Shift: 07:00-15:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Aligning
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: USEISM_EARTHQUAKE
Wind: 3mph Gusts, 1mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.97 μm/s
Secondary useism: 1.28 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
Starting the Shift Oli and I noticed that the IFO was still relocking and needed an initial_alignment.
Since then Initial_alignment had stalled and been restarted. Possibly because the IMC was unlocked. I'm usure if Oli had done that or not.
Once that completed Another earthquake hit but was not announced over verbals.
M 5.3 - 60 km WSW of Pozo Dulce, Mexico 2024-04-18 07:39:45 (UTC)26.546°N 110.267°W10.0 km depth
So I'm just waiting on the earthquake to pass.
TITLE: 04/18 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY: Quiet night most of the night, but had a local earthquake knock us out close to the end of my shift. Currently running an initial alignment with the help of H1 MANAGER running an initial alignment and Tony watching H1 MANAGER run the initial alignment to make sure H1 MANAGER gets us locking once that's done.
LOG:
23:00 Detector Observing and Locked for over 15 hours
06:08 Earthquake mode activated
06:11 Lockloss due to local earthquake
- ALS flashed were really low and took a while to get up
07:03 Started an Initial Alignment
Lockloss 04/18 06:11UTC due to local earthquake :( We were locked for 22.5 hours
Observing at 155Mpc and locked for 20 hours exactly. Calm evening with low wind
Naoki, Vicky, Jennie W
Naoki followed the directions in to set up the SQZ beam OMC scan.
We had a problem with the DC centering loops. After we switched them on they saturated the OM1 and OM2 suspensions.
We got around this by switching each of the 4 degrees of freedom on first - ie. DC3 Y, DC3 P, DC4 Y, DC4 P.
Then we engaged OMC ASC and this seemed to work ok.
When we tried to manually lock the OMC length loop we had problems as when we switched the gain of 1 on it would lose lock, even when on a TM00 mode of the expected height (0.6mA on DCPD_SUM).
Vicky got around this this using a lower gain and not engaging the BOOST filter in the servo filter bank.
Then she had to touch up the alignment in lock with OM3.
locked quiet time 1397329970 GPS 1 min:
OMC-REFL_A_LF_OUT16 = 0.0930255 mW
OMC-DCPD_SUM_OUTPUT = 0.652156 mA
unlocked quiet time 1397330106 GPS 1 minute:
OMC-REFL_A_LF_OUT16 = 1.04825 mW
OMC-DCPD_SUM_OUTPUT = -0.00133668 mA
dark measurement 1397330625 GPS 1 minute:
OMC-REFL_A_LF_OUT16 = -0.0133655 mW
OMC-DCPD_SUM_OUTPUT = -0.00133668 mA
I noticed after I took the dark measurement that OM1 and 2 were staurating again and need to clear history twice on OM1 to remove this.
Reverted OM1 and 2, 3 OMC sliders at 8:33 am (local time) on the 16th April.
Data is saved as REf 3, 4 and 5 in /ligo/home/jennifer.wright/Documents/OMC_scan/2024_04_16_OMC_scan.xml. Where 3 is the scan channel OMC-DCPD_SUM_OUT_DQ on the bottom right plot, 4 is the PZT excitation channel OMC-PZT2_EXC on the bottom left plot, and 5 is the monitor of the actual PZT output voltage OMC-PZT2_MON_DC_OUT_DQ on the top right plot.
Using Sheila's code from this entry and updating the code with the current OMC values for transmission of the mirrors:
Tio = 7670e-6 #according to T1500060 page 116 input and output mirror transmission
R_inBS = 1-7400e-6
The outout of the code gives us the following values for the cavity incident power, efficiency and finesse:
Power on refl diode when cavity is off resonance: 1.062 mW
Incident power on OMC breadboard (before QPD pickoff): 1.078 mW
Power on refl diode on resonance: 0.106 mW
Measured effiency (DCPD current/responsivity if QE=1)/ incident power on OMC breadboard: 70.5 %
assumed QE: 100 %
power in transmission (for this QE) 0.760 mW
HOM content infered: 8.748 %
Cavity transmission infered: 77.827 %
predicted efficiency () (R_inputBS * mode_matching * cavity_transmission * QE): 70.493 %
omc efficency for 00 mode (including pick off BS, cavity transmission, and QE): 77.251 %
round trip loss: 2063 (ppm)
Finesse: 362.923
I need to compare the HOM content measurement with that derived from the mode scan.
TJ, Camilla. WP 11811
Yesterday, we repeated the 76715 CO2 beam scan using a razor blade on a 25mm transition stage while measuring the power transmitted to our PD (channel H1:TCS-ITMX/Y_CO2_LSRPWR_MTR_OUTPUT).
We realized that some of the blocked beam was transmitted through a hole in the razor blade in our first set of measurements (changed radius measurement ~1mm) so the CO2X 76715 are not as trusted.
All data taken for CO2X and CO2Y attached and summarized below:
Position Downstream of CO2Y Annular Mask [mm]
Downstream = (+), Upstream = (-)
|
Beam Raduis [mm] | Prev. measured with hole in razor |
- 238 | 11.39 | 12.34 |
0 | N/A | 11.27 (think hole was covered) |
+143 | 10.77 | 11.17 |
+194 | 10.61 | 11.39 |
Position Downstream of CO2X Annular Mask [mm]
Downstream = (+), Upstream = (-)
|
Beam Raduis [mm] |
+ 32 | 9.85 |
+ 133 | 10.01 |
+184 | 10.49 |
TITLE: 04/17 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 126Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Oli
SHIFT SUMMARY:
IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING
Comissioning today went well. We survived a few high magntitude earthquakes.
LOG:
Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
15:14 | FAC | Karen | Optics, Vac Prep Labs | N | Technical Cleaning | 15:43 |
15:43 | FAC | Ken | FC Enclosure | N | Electrical maintenance | 16:43 |
15:44 | FAC | Karen | MY | N | Technical Cleaning | 16:44 |
17:17 | FAC | Fil | CS Recieving Door | N | Roll up recieving door | 18:17 |
21:16 | SQZ | Andrei, Sheila | Optics Lab | N | Tour | 22:16 |
TITLE: 04/17 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 146Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 16mph Gusts, 12mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.10 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
We're Observing and have been Locked for over 15 hours.
Jennie, Jim
We tried Gabriele's newest version of the HAM1 ASC feedforward. New filters were installed last week, but we ran out of time during the commissioning window. It seems like we can still only get good subtraction from the pitch degrees of freedom, we got a lot of 10-ish hz injection when we engaged the yaw degrees of freedom.
To start we turned off the HAM1 ff, by setting H1:HPI-HAM1_TTL4C_FF_INF_{RX,RY,Z,X)}_GAIN to zero, then shutting off the H1:HPI-HAM1_TTL4C_FF_OUTSW. While collecting that data we switched to the new filters, and zerod the gains for all of the individual H1:HPI-HAM1_TTL4C_FF_CART2ASC{P,Y}_{DOF}_{DOF}_GAIN filter banks. We then tried turning on all of the pitch feedforward first, by ramping the gains in a couple of steps from 0 to 1. It seemed like it worked well, but I don't think we actually got to full gain of 1. We then tried turning on the yaw FF, but that pretty quickly started injecting noise around 10hz, first attached spectra, red traces are with the new ff, blue are with ff off.
Second image are trends where Jennie tries to reconstruct the timeline, which is how we found the first pitch test wasn't complete. Sheila ran an A2L measurement, then we tried the pitch ff again, spectra in the third plot. All of the red traces are new P ff (1397415884), blue is the old (1397407980), green is with the ff off (1397405754). This worked well, we got some slight improvements around 15hz, new chard p gets rid of some noise injection around 2hz. We didn't see the pitch ff affect the yaw dofs.
We left the new pitch filters running, and accepted in the Observe SDF. The yaw filters were left off.
I looked at the attempt of engaging the HAM1 yaw FF:
1) the filter that were loaded were correct, meaning they were what I expected
2) retraining with a time when the HAM1 pitch FF were on yields yaw filters that are similar to what was tried, so it doesn't look like it's a pitch / yaw interaction (Jennie also pointed to some evidence of this in the alog)
I suspect there might be cross coupling between the various yaw dofs. I would suggest that we upload the newly trained filters (attached) and try to engage the yaw FF one by one, starting from CHARD that is the one we care most
TCS Chiller Water Level Top-Off (Bi-Weekly, FAMIS #27787)
Closes FAMIS 27787
We wanted to check the PRCL offset during our commissoning time this morning, we ended up not having much time for that but did re-run Elenna's template from 76814. It looks like the PRCL to REFL RIN transfer function is much the same as at that time. It seems as though there was a change in the PRCL to DARM transfer function, but that measurement has low coherence at most frequencies.
Joe B from LLO and I ran the short and long stochastic injections with the commands below starting at 19:08UTC. Both ran successfully, back to Observing at 1955UTC
hwinj stochastic short --time 1397416098 --run
ifo: H1
waveform root: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/hwinj
config file: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/hwinj/hwinj.yaml
GraceDB url: https://gracedb.ligo.org/api/
GraceDB group: Detchar
GraceDB pipeline: HardwareInjection
excitation channel: H1:CAL-INJ_TRANSIENT_EXC
injection group: stochastic
injection name: short
reading waveform file...
injection waveform file: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/hwinj/stochastic/SB_ER15HLShort_H1.txt
injection waveform sample rate: 16384
injection waveform length: 780.0 seconds
injection start GPS: 1397416098.0
hwinj stochastic long --time 1397417118 --run
ifo: H1
waveform root: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/hwinj
config file: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/hwinj/hwinj.yaml
GraceDB url: https://gracedb.ligo.org/api/
GraceDB group: Detchar
GraceDB pipeline: HardwareInjection
excitation channel: H1:CAL-INJ_TRANSIENT_EXC
injection group: stochastic
injection name: long
reading waveform file...
injection waveform file: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/hwinj/stochastic/SB_ER15HLLong_H1.txt
injection waveform sample rate: 16384
injection waveform length: 1800.0 seconds
injection start GPS: 1397417118.0
H1 is now finished with comissioning and IFO is now OBSERVING
Sheila, Naoki, Vicky, Camilla
As we continue to see the nominal SQZ angle change lock-to-lock (attached BLRMs). We edited SQZ_MANAGER to scan sqz angle (takes 120s) every time the SQZ locks, i.e. every time we go into NLN.
In SQZ_MANAGER we have:
We tested this taking SQZ_MANAGER down and back up, it went though SCAN_SQZANG as expected and improved the SQZ by 1dB, range improved by ~10MPc.
We'll want to monitor that the change as SCAN_SQZANG may not give us the best angle at the start of the lock when SQZ is very variable. We expect this won't delay us going into observing as only added 120s and ISC_LOCK is often still waiting for ADS to converge during this time.
I have removed this change of path by removing thew weighting as we can see last night SCAN_SQZANG at the start of the lock took us to a bad squeezing once thermalized.
We weren't seeing this changing angular dependence as much before 77133 with the older PSAMS settings (8.8V,-0.7V) or (7.2V, -0.72V). Current (7.5V,0.5V). We think we should revert to the older setting.