Ops Shift Transition: 02/04/2020, Day Shift 16:00–00:00 (08:00-16:00) - UTC (PT)

State of H1: Tuesday Maintenance

Intent Bit: Commissioning

Weather: 0-10 mph wind

Primary 0.03 – 0.1Hz: 0.01 um/s

Secondary 0.1 – 0.3Hz: 0.3 um/s

Outgoing Operator: Jeff

Quick Summary: Locked for 75 hours, will likely drop out soon as maintenance commences. EX access is lightly blocked at a few points.

   Smooth shift so far. There was a high temperature alarm on Mid-Y air handler reheat, which has returned to normal. There have been a few DCPD saturations. 

   Current range is 120.5Mpc. The wind is down but microseism continues climbing.    

TITLE: 02/03 Eve Shift: 00:00-08:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 119Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Jeff
SHIFT SUMMARY: Briefly out of observing at the start of the shift for Jeff K. to change a calibration line. Remained locked and in observing the remainder of the shift. No issues.
LOG:

00:00 UTC Briefly out of observing for Jeff K. to change calibration line
00:18 UTC Chandra driving down X arm
00:47 UTC Chandra back

Have remained locked and in observing. No issues.

FAMIS 12885

From script:
BS_ST2_CPSINF_V1_I high freq noise is high!
ETMX_ST2_CPSINF_H1 high freq noise is high!
ETMY_ST2_CPSINF_V2 high freq noise is high!

J. Kissel

I've briefly taken us out of observation ready at 2020-02-04 00:00:02 UTC to switch the PCALX vs. PCALY "cancelling" line "back" to 1153.1 and 1153.2 Hz respectively (having started the test after calibration tests this morning; see LHO aLOG 54868). Though, they're no longer cancelling, because they are at X = 1153.10 and Y = 1153.20 Hz, instead of both being at 1153.10 Hz as they used to be.

We've returned to observation ready with these new settings at 2020-02-04 00:00:19 UTC, with the frequency changes stored in the OBSERVE.snaps of the calex and caley models. We'll still need to save the settings in the safe.snap, but we can do that tomorrow during maintenance day.

This concludes the lower frequency, X = 530.1 and Y = 530.2 Hz test, having spent 
   2020-02-03 19:53:05 UTC = 1264794803
   2020-02-04 00:00:02 UTC = 1264809620
   dT = 14817.0 seconds or 4.11 hours 
with the 530 Hz line combination on.

Others will perform the data analysis on this data and post results in due time.

TITLE: 02/03 Eve Shift: 00:00-08:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 119Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Niko
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_CONF state: WINDY
    Wind: 10mph Gusts, 7mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.35 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY: Briefly out of observing at start of shift for Jeff K. to change calibration line. No issues.

TITLE: 02/03 Day Shift 16:00 – 00:00 (08:00-16:00), all times posted in UTC

STATE of H1: Observing

INCOMING OPERATOR: Patrick

SHIFT SUMMARY: Quiet shift, SQZ unlocked once, performed scheduled calibration injections, and had one GRB. Locked for 59 hours.

LOG: 

16:59 (08:59) SQZ unlocked

17:03 (09:03) Took SQZ Guardian to down and back up. Going into Observing

17:22 (09:22) Camilla to mechanical room -- check chillers

17:39 (09:39) Camilla back from mechanical room

20:40 (12:40) GRB E362174 -- standing down for 15 minutes

20:48 (12:48) Karen to MY

20:56 (12:56) Karen leaving MY

21:17 (13:17) Kyle to MY

J. Kissel

I've measured the standard weekly collection of measurements for the sensing function in the DARM loop today. Because they're quick, and we're curious elsewhere (see LHO aLOG 54868) I also grabbed measurements with PCALX as well (like we used to do regularly until we realized the sensing function had plenty enough mysteries to solve without seeing discrepancies between X and Y end absolute references).

Anyways -- here's the data files:
Swept Sine measurements across the frequency band:
/ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/O3/H1/Measurements/FullIFOSensingTFs/
    2020-02-03_H1_DARM_OLGTF_LF_SS_5to1100Hz_15min.xml
    2020-02-03_H1_PCALX2DARMTF_LF_SS_5t1100Hz_10min.xml
    2020-02-03_H1_PCALY2DARMTF_LF_SS_5t1100Hz_10min.xml

Broadband PCAL injections (about 3 minutes of data) with good SNR between 20-300 Hz:
/ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/O3/H1/Measurements/FullIFOSensingTFs
    2020-02-03_H1_PCALX2DARMTF_BB_3min.xml      Start time: 2020-02-03 19:05:16 UTC
    2020-02-03_H1_PCALY2DARMTF_BB_3min.xml      Start time: 2020-02-03 19:00:47 UTC

Data analysis to come.

Shifter: Matthew Ball

Fellow: Sudarshan Karki

Mentor: Borja Sorazu

• Mean duty cycle: 46.6% + 52.9% + 83.7% + 58.7% + 76.3% + 92.7% + 99.7% = 72.9%
• Several sudden locklosses where operators noted coincident FSS transients
• ITMX temperature jumped (back) up on Tuesday, recovering from a drop on January 21
  • ITMY also dropped on Jan 21, but has not recovered yet
• 33Hz on/off line noted in previous DQ shifts lines up with many corner station accelerometers
  • A Bruco scan of one of the flare-ups found coherence with a HAM 6 accelerometer and the M2 level of the beam splitter suspension
• A 90Hz glitch line shows up sporadically through the week
• Heavy wind during the latter half of the week led to several drops in range and (at least) one lockloss
• Squeezer issues plagued Saturday and Sunday:
  • It "stalled" several times, knocking the IFO out of observing
  • Elevated DCPD signal lines up with significant range drops. This behavior is usually near one of these "stalls"
• On the plus side, varying the CLF demod angle bumped the range up to 120Mpc on Friday

Full shift: https://wiki.ligo.org/DetChar/DataQuality/DQShiftLHO20200127

T240 check:

There are 9 T240 proof masses out of range ( > 0.3 [V] )!

ETMX T240 2 DOF Y/V = -1.216 [V]
ETMX T240 2 DOF Z/W = -0.786 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.408 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF X/U = -1.38 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF X/U = -1.42 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.325 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF X/U = -0.483 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF Z/W = -1.763 [V]

All other proof masses are within range ( < 0.3 [V] ):
ETMX T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.027 [V]
ETMX T240 1 DOF Y/V = -0.055 [V]
ETMX T240 1 DOF Z/W = -0.122 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF X/U = -0.111 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF Y/V = -0.123 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF Z/W = -0.069 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.1 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF Z/W = -0.029 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF X/U = -0.062 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF Y/V = -0.0.07 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF Z/W = -0.067 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF X/U = -0.041 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF Y/V = -0.102 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF Z/W = 0.084 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.155 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.152 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.135 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.216 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.22 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF Y/V = 0.108 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF Z/W = -0.018 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF X/U = 0.149 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.147 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.247 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.094 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.228 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF Y/V = 0.195 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.011 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF Y/V = -0.108 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.292 [V]

BS T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.088 [V]
BS T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.264 [V]
BS T240 2 DOF Z/W = -0.009 [V]
BS T240 3 DOF X/U = 0.081 [V]
BS T240 3 DOF Y/V = -0.171 [V]

STS check:

There are 1 STS proof masses out of range ( > 2.0 [V] )!
STS B DOF X/U = -2.283 [V]

All other proof masses are within range ( < 2.0 [V] ):
STS A DOF X/U = -0.8 [V]
STS A DOF Y/V = -0.874 [V]
STS A DOF Z/W = -0.427 [V]
STS B DOF Y/V = -0.461 [V]
STS B DOF Z/W = -0.314 [V]
STS C DOF X/U = 0.365 [V]
STS C DOF Y/V = 0.871 [V]
STS C DOF Z/W = -0.133 [V]
STS EX DOF X/U = -0.131 [V]
STS EX DOF Y/V = 0.314 [V]
STS EX DOF Z/W = 0.225 [V]
STS EY DOF X/U = 0.45 [V]
STS EY DOF Y/V = -0.336 [V]
STS EY DOF Z/W = 0.719 [V]

BS T240 3 DOF Z/W = -0.176 [V]

J. Kissel, for R. Savage and S. Karki

As we continue to explore systematic error in the calibration during the O3 run, a remaining outstanding mystery is the discrepancy seen between PCALX and PCALY at the 0.5% level as measured through the interferometer (see current inconclusive state of the analysis, e.g. LHO aLOGs 53195, 53244, and 53259). 

In order to get *really* good SNR on this measurement, we're going to move the line down to 530.1 and 530.2 Hz for PCALX and PCALY, respectively, for about ~4 hours. We will retain the same excitation amplitude, but the signal to noise should improve by a factor of 8 or so, which will allows us to make discriminating statements at the ~0.1% level, where -- to-date -- we have not been able to. Here will be the temporary parameters:

    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_OSC_FREQ        530.1
    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_OSC_SINGAIN    5007.0
    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_OSC_COSGAIN    5007.0
    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_PHASE             0.0
    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_OSC_TRAMP         5.0

    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_OSC_FREQ        530.2
    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_OSC_SINGAIN    3619.0
    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_OSC_COSGAIN    3619.0
    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_PHASE             0.0
    H1:CAL-PCALX_PCALOSC9_OSC_TRAMP         5.0

I'll be turning this line on during the routine calibration measurement time, then we'll be going in to OBSERVATION READY for about ~4 hours, and then we'll return the PCALX / PCALY pair of calibration lines to 1153.1 and 1153.2 Hz [note *different than before*: they were at the same frequency, now they will remain 0.1 Hz apart.]

End X accessibility status TBA later today

SQZ - SHG alignment/ISS OLG check

VAC - closing GV20 changing turbo, leak check (EX, requires 8 hour maintenance day)

PSL - anteroom inventory check (extra work dependent on 8 hours maintenance day)

CDS - Restart GIGE cameras/inspect PEM BSC temp. Probe

EE - Power line hunting (EX/EY)

SUS - EY charge measurement

SUS - ETM noisemon TF’s

FAMIS 11529

05:00 UTC Squeezer takes us out of observing.

The SQZ_MANAGER node seems to say it is stalled.

I hit INIT on the SQZ_MANAGER node.

The SQZ_MANAGER guardian state makes it back to SQUEEZING.

There is an SDF difference (attached). I accepted it.

05:04 UTC Back to observing.