Displaying reports 341-360 of 85662.Go to page Start 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 End
Reports until 00:45, Wednesday 29 October 2025
LHO VE (VE)
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - posted 00:45, Wednesday 29 October 2025 - last comment - 18:32, Tuesday 04 November 2025(87814)
CP1 LN2 Fill Line Pump Down

(Jordan V., Gerardo M.)
Connected valves to be able to pump down the CP1 LN2 fill line, we started with 26 micron of pressure and we pumped down on the system with a scroll pump for most of the maintenance period, we stopped the pump down of the fill line at around 11:45 AM with pressure down to 4 micron.  Both valves were closed before turning off the scroll pump.  Hoses, adapter and valves remain connected, we intent to visit this item next week again.

 

 

 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - 18:32, Tuesday 04 November 2025 (87964)VE

Today all hardware used to pump down the fill line was removed, initial reading was that of 3 microns, but after all the items were removed the reported internal pressure went up to 7 microns.  We'll take another reading next Tuesday.

H1 General
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - posted 22:00, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87826)
Ops EVE Shift End

TITLE: 10/29 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 148Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY: 

Observing at 151 Mpc and have been Locked for 4.5 hours. Relocking today after maintenance was a bit strange, with two locklosses right after passing through CLOSE_BEAM_DIVERTERS. After the second attempt ended in a lockloss, during our third relocking attempt, we got stuck in PREP_DC_READOUT_TRANSITION for a bit until we discovered that the changes to the OMC whitening gain changes that had been happening as we lost lock hadn't been reverted (87813). We fixed that and continued to LASER_NOISE_SUPPRESSION, where we sat for a longer amount of time than it would have normally taken us to get up to where we lost lock the last two times. While waiting, we encountered the 1 Hz ringup again (seen during the previous two locking attempts as well), and turned on the hi asc gains to combat it. We eventually stepped up to ADS_TO_CAMERAS, then were able to turn off the hi asc gains without it ringing up again. We stepped one-by-one through the net few guardian states, waiting for a lockloss, which ended up not happening! Everything looked good so we went into Observing.

We don't know what was causing those two locklosses, but at the very least I looked through the logs and found that they didn't happen at the same spot in the locking sequence, so that rules out anything from OMC_WHITENING (and obviously CLOSE_BEAM_DIVERTERS) (first lockloss log, second lockloss log).

LOG:

23:30UTC Attempting relock #3 after maintenance day
    - Paused in LASER_NOISE_SUPPRESSION
    - Turned on hi gains because of 1Hz ringup
    - Turned off hi gains
    - 1 Hz started ringing up, turned hi gains back on
    - Stepped to ADS_TO_CAMERAS
    - Once ADS_TO_CAMERAS was done, turned hi gains off to see if we still had the ringup
    - Stepped through the rest of the states one at a time, no locklosses
00:28 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
00:29 Observing

Images attached to this report
H1 AOS
jenne.driggers@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:04, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87813)
Getting un-stuck from having lost lock during OMC whitening change

[Jennie, Elenna, Oli, Keita, MattT, Jenne]

One of our locklosses this afternoon happens to have been while the OMC DCPD whitening was switching (reason is under separate investigation).  It happens that the gains we use for these now are the A0 and B0 gains, in filter banks on the IOPOMC0 model, not the OMC model.  The IOPOMC0 model is not part of the SDF revert process (probably because we never thought to add it in?).  This means that upon relock, the OMC guardian was confused when it was asked to do the SET_WHITENING state and it found that the gains were 0 or 2, not 1 and 1.  

The OMC guardian's DOWN state had an old comment (from before the omc0 days) where we explicitly set DCPD_A_GAIN and DCPD_B_GAIN both to 1, in case we lose lock during a whitening switch. For now (and in case we decide we don't want to add IOPOMC0 to the sdf revert list) I've added lines to also set DCPD_A0_GAIN and DCPD_B0_GAIN both to 1.  Hopefully we won't get stuck on this small little piece again, and can get back to figuring out our bigger locking issues.

H1 CDS
erik.vonreis@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:49, Tuesday 28 October 2025 - last comment - 16:55, Tuesday 28 October 2025(87811)
Long range ethernet testing at EY

[Fil, Jonathan, Ej, Erik]

Two previously unused pairs of optical fiber between EY and the Corner station were extended from patch panels to the computer racks in EY and the MSR.

Two computers were setup on either end to test Ethernet throughput and reliability, lr-eth-c in the MSR and lr-eth-e and EY.  Each computer had a Intel e810 with 100g SFP  and an NVidia Mellanox  with 25g/10g SFP.

The first pair tested did not produce a link light.

The second pair was able to push 80g on the Intel card and 25g on the NVidia card, with no lost data but with a low rate of correctable errors on the EY card.

In an attempt to lower that error rate, we swapped the extension fiber at EY from the first (failed) fiber pair to the second, and cleaned it multiple times.  This in fact raised the correctable error rate, but it's still operating with no data losses.

 

Comments related to this report
ezekiel.dohmen@LIGO.ORG - 16:55, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87812)

With Jumbo frames configured these are the iper3 results on the 100Gig (Intel E810):

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr
[ 5] 0.00-60.00 sec 168 GBytes 24.0 Gbits/sec 5 sender
[ 5] 0.00-60.00 sec 168 GBytes 24.0 Gbits/sec receiver
[ 7] 0.00-60.00 sec 206 GBytes 29.5 Gbits/sec 9 sender
[ 7] 0.00-60.00 sec 206 GBytes 29.5 Gbits/sec receiver
[ 9] 0.00-60.00 sec 188 GBytes 26.8 Gbits/sec 4 sender
[ 9] 0.00-60.00 sec 188 GBytes 26.8 Gbits/sec receiver
[SUM] 0.00-60.00 sec 561 GBytes 80.3 Gbits/sec 18 sender
[SUM] 0.00-60.00 sec 561 GBytes 80.3 Gbits/sec receiver

For the 25 Gig real time testing we are getting a round trip time (mean) of 50.1 us. In the state we left it at the end of today there are some error counters ticking, but no lost packets.

controls@lr-eth-e:$ sudo ethtool -S ens4f0np0 | grep err
     rx_crc_errors_phy: 5
     rx_in_range_len_errors_phy: 0
     rx_symbol_err_phy: 4
     tx_errors_phy: 0
     rx_pcs_symbol_err_phy: 4
     rx_err_lane_0_phy: 474801

 

LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:30, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87800)
Ops Day Shift End

TITLE: 10/28 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Preventive Maintenance
INCOMING OPERATOR: Oli
SHIFT SUMMARY: Maintenance day today. Recovery has been troubling so far, we can get up to OMC_WHITENING but then lose lock. It will get to that point without issue, but then a quick 9Hz ringup in DARM will show up. I;ve attached a printout of the Trello of activities today, but none are glaring causes for something like this. The control room is currently looking into many possibilities and following up from 60W input with misaligned IM4,  ISS injections today, and other activities.
LOG:

Start Time System Name Location Lazer_Haz Task Time End
14:36 FAC Randy Xarm n BTE sealing 21:59
15:15 FAC Kim EX n Tech clean 16:36
15:15 FAC Nellie EY n Tech clean 16:26
15:16 CDS Fil, Erik EY n RFM test 19:02
15:17 VAC Gerardo LVEA n CP1 fill line connect 18:45
15:20 FAC Eric site n Fire pump tests 15:40
15:22 VAC Jordan LVEA n Help at CP1 line then HAM4 AIP troubleshooting 17:25
15:28 FAC Tyler LVEA, VEAs n 3IFO checks 17:14
15:30 FAC Chris MX n Tractor clearing tumbleweeds 17:35
15:33 SUS Jeff CR n PRM meas. 19:03
15:54 VAC Janos EX, MX n Pump tests 18:43
15:58 SYS Mitchell LVEA n Parts hunt 16:11
16:05 PSL Jason CR n Ref cav tweak 16:06
16:16 SAF Safety tour EX, EY n Safety walkthrough 18:03
16:20 PEM Ryan S CR/LVEA n Magnetic injections 18:47
16:20 VAC Norco EX, MX n LN2 fill 18:47
16:37 FAC Kim LVEA n Tech clean 18:05
16:45 IO Keita, Rahul Opt Lab LOCAL ISS array 18:58
16:45 FAC Nellie LVEA n Tech clean 18:04
16:52 SEI Jim Remote n HAM6 HEPI FF injections 18:15
17:35 FAC Benton PUD Yarm n Grabbing equipment at transformer \ 17:55
17:35 FAC Chris Outbuildings n FAMIS checks 18:26
18:04 SAF Safety tour LVEA n Safety walkthrough 18:30
18:13 PCAL Rick PCAL lab local Grabbing blues 18:15
18:31 SAF Safety tour X1 BTE n Check on cracks, splaying of BTE 19:16
18:42 VAC Jordan, Anna LVEA N Join Gerardo CP1 18:59
18:53 TCS TJ LVEA n Turn TCS CO2s back on 18:54
18:54 CDS Marc LVEA n Wrapping up cable pulling HAM3/2 18:57
18:55 - Ryan C LVEA n Sweep 19:05
19:38 PCAL Rick PCAL lab local Parts 19:52
20:34 SPI Corey, Ryan S Opt Lab n Optics cleaning 22:47
20:51 SUS Rahul Opt Lab LOCAL Parts 22:06
21:04 TCS Matt Prep lab n Building racks 22:57
21:43 IO Keita Opt Lab LOCAL ISS array 22:46
21:45 SAF Safety tour FCES n Safety walkthrough 22:06
22:30 VAC Gerardo LVEA n Grab a cube for a cart 22:35
22:57 PEM Ryan C Opt Lab n Setup dust monitor 23:07
Non-image files attached to this report
H1 General
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:30, Tuesday 28 October 2025 - last comment - 17:33, Tuesday 28 October 2025(87810)
Ops EVE Shift Start

TITLE: 10/28 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Preventive Maintenance
OUTGOING OPERATOR: TJ
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 12mph Gusts, 7mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.28 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

Attempting to relock again and trying to figure out why we just had two locklosses directly after CLOSE_BEAM_DIVERTERS/start of OMC_WHITENING.

Comments related to this report
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 17:33, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87815)

00:29UTC Back to Observing

H1 SEI (ISC, OpsInfo)
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:07, Tuesday 28 October 2025 - last comment - 13:56, Thursday 30 October 2025(87788)
SEI_ENV node testing with High ASC gain testing Rd 2

Summary

Round 2 of testing the guardianization of turning on and off the high ASC gains (Round 1 - alog87462). SEI_ENV will now automatically move us into the high gain ASC state when a.) we are in the earthquake state b.) there is an incoming or ongoing earthquake that is at or below the dotted line on the "rasta plot"The transition takes 11 seconds to complete, and it will transition back when the ground motion is low enough to bring us out earthquake state.

Details from today

I started testing with a few 10 and 5 second waits between steps, just as is done in the script that we currently use. Once those ran successfully a few times I started to decrease the wait times between steps. Eventually, I had success transitioning all the ASC at the same time, then the FF 10 seconds after. since this was the same configuration that I had last time I tried this, tried to reporduce the lock loss by requesting the High ASC state, then immediately requesting the Low ASC state. This did, again, cause a lock loss. To avoid this I have a wait timer in the High state so it won't switch quickly from one to the other.

Transitioning back out of the high ASC state has the same thresholds as the earthquake state currently. We didn't want to transition back and then have to do it all over again, or wait in earthquake for another 10 minutes for it to calm down. We might make this a bit shorter or smarter after we've seen it work a few times.

Time (hhmmss UTC) Transition to Notes
150251 High 10/5s timers
150457 Low 10/5s timers
150616 High Repeat of above
150724 Low Repeat of above
150754 High 1/5s timers
150930 Low 1/5s timers
151113 High All ASC engaged at once
151218 Low All ASC engaged at once
151326 High All ASC engaged at once
151340 Low Lock loss

 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - 13:56, Thursday 30 October 2025 (87863)OpsInfo

I forgot that this would eventually trigger IFO_NOTIFY if the high gain state were to keep us out of Observing for longer than 10 minutes while IFO_NOTIFY was running. I've changed IFO_NOTIFY to not notify when the SEI_ENV node is in the high asc or transition states.

H1 SUS (SEI)
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:48, Tuesday 28 October 2025 - last comment - 15:57, Tuesday 11 November 2025(87801)
H1SUSPRM M3, M2, and M1 Drive to M1 Response TFs to inform Estimator Models
J. Kissel

Gathered H1SUSPRM M3, M2, and M1 Drive to M1 Response TFs to inform the "drive" models for a future H1SUSPRM estimator. I'll post the locations / file names in the comments. Here in the main entry, I discuss the state of the control system for H1 SUS PRM so we understand with how much salt would should take these measurements.

Executive summary :: there are some side quests we can launch -- especially on the actuation side of this suspension -- if we think that these measurements reveal "way too much cross coupling for an estimator to work." The first things I'd attack would be 
    - the frequency-dependent and scalar gain differences *between* the nominal low noise state of the coil drivers and the state we need to characterize the suspension. 
    - the very old coil balancing, which was done *without* first compensating for any frequency-dependent gain differences in the channels at the frequency used to balance the coils (see LHO:9453 for measurement technique.)

Here's the detailed summary of all the relevant things for these measurements:
    - The suspension was ALIGNED, with alignment offsets ON, with slider values (P,Y) = (-1629.783, -59.868) ["urad"] 
        :: ALIGNED is needed (rather than just DAMPED [where the alignment sliders are OFF] or MISALIGNED where extra large alignment offsets are ON; per discussion of how the alignment impacts the calibration in LHO:87102)
        :: the usual caveats about the slider calibration, which is still using the [DAC ct / "urad"] gains from LHO:4563).

    - The M1 damping loop were converted to Level 2.0 loop shaping in Jan 2023; LHO:66859, nominally designed to have an EPICs gain of -1.0. However in Aug 2023, the EPICs gains were lowered to -0.5, and have been that way for most of O4, and remain that way now. For all of these measurements, I set the L, P and Y gains to -0.1; the "20% of nominal" gain mantra we've used for the HLTS estimators. I also gathered *almost* all the measurements again with only the Y gain at -0.1, but ran out of time to complete that set for comparison. 

    - Even though it was maintenance day, when we typically turn site-wide sensor correction OFF, I manually turned ON sensor correction for ISI HAM2 to get better coherence below 1 Hz (using instructions in LHO:87790)

    - The M3 L to M3 P filter (and gain) in the M3 DRIVEALIGN frequency-dependent matrix is OFF, per LHO:87523. 

    - There are (M3 P to M3 L) = 1.7 and (M3 Y to M3 L) = 0.52 scalar gains ON in to off-diagonal elements of the M3 DRIVEALIGN matrix whose purpose is change the center of P and Y actuation to be around where the IFO's beam spot typically is.

    - There is a set of M1 L to M1 P filters, "M1L_M3P" and "invM1P_M3P," in the M1 DRIVEALIGN matrix, with a EPICs gain of -1. I think these came from LHO:42549. The measurements I took aren't impacted by this, as I drove from the M1 TEST bank which does not send excitation through the DRIVEALIGN Matrix. HOWEVER, we'll definitely need to consider this when we model the ISC drive which *does* go through the M1 DRIVEALIGN matrix.

    - All M1, M2, and M3 stages of OSEM PDs sat amp whitening filters have been upgraded with ECR E2400330's filter design, and compensated accordingly. 
        :: M1 stage LHO:85463
        :: M2 & M3 stages LHO:87103

    - All M1, M2, and M3 stages of OSEM PDs have been calibrated via the ISI GS13s, and calibrated in the ALIGNED state (LHO:87231)

    - In order to get decent coherence over the band of interest for the M3, M2, and M1 drives, I had to drive the suspension actuators in their highest range state, which is different from the state the IFO usually needs.
        :: M1 = State 1 "LP OFF" (a Triple TOP Driver)
        :: M2 = State 2 "Acq ON, LP OFF" (An ECR E1400369 Triple Acquisition Driver "TACQ" modified for an extra 10x actuation strength. Modified in Sep 2013 LHO:7630)
        :: M3 = State 2 "Acq ON, LP OFF" (An ECR E1400369 Triple Acquisition Driver "TACQ" modified for an extra 10x actuation strength. Modified in Sep 2014 LHO:13956)

        :: The nominal state for the switches are M1 = State 2 "LP ON," M2 = M3 = State 3 "ACQ OFF, LP ON."

    - No actuator channels have had any precise compensation for their coil driver's frequency response in any state.
        :: M1 state 1 channels are all compensated with (z:p) = (0.9 : 30.9996) Hz
        :: M2 state 2 channels are all compensated with (z:p) = (64.9966 : 13) Hz
        :: M3 state 2 channels are all compensated with (z:p) = (64.9966 : 13) Hz

    - There are scalar "coil balancing" non-unity magnitude gains on each of the M2 and M3 stage channels, but it's the same values that have been in play since Jan 2014 (LHO:9419; so, after the M2 TACQ driver mod, but before the M3 TACQ driver mod). There is no coil balancing gains on the M1 stage, they're all either +/- 1.0.

Comments related to this report
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 14:52, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87808)SEI
Here's the complete data set with L, P, and Y damping loop gains set to -0.1, with the T, V, and R gains at -0.5.

    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM1/Data/
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M1toM1_CDState1_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M1toM1_CDState1_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_P_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M1toM1_CDState1_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_R_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M1toM1_CDState1_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_T_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M1toM1_CDState1_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_V_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M1toM1_CDState1_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml

    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM2/Data/
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M2toM1_CDState2_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M2toM1_CDState2_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_P_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M2toM1_CDState2_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml

    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM3/Data/
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M3toM1_CDState2_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M3toM1_CDState2_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_P_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M3toM1_CDState2_M1LPYDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 14:53, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87809)
Here's the almost entirely complete data set for *only* the Y damping loop gain set to -0.1, and L, T, V, R, P set to -0.5.

    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM1/Data/
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M1toM1_CDState1_M1YawDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M1toM1_CDState1_M1YawDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_T_0p02to50Hz.xml
        [did not get V]
        [did not get R]
        [did not get P]
        [did not get Y]

    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM2/Data/
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M2toM1_CDState2_M1YawDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M2toM1_CDState2_M1YawDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_P_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M2toM1_CDState2_M1YawDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml

    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM3/Data/
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M3toM1_CDState2_M1YawDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M3toM1_CDState2_M1YawDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_P_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2025-10-28_H1SUSPRM_M3toM1_CDState2_M1YawDampingGain0p1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 13:45, Tuesday 04 November 2025 (87951)

Took some more of the meaurements for PRM estimator here: 87950

Those four M1 to M1 with DAMP Y at 20% for V R P and Y are still needed

oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 15:57, Tuesday 11 November 2025 (88066)

Here's the list of estimator measurements for PRM: 88063

H1 SUS (SUS)
filiberto.clara@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:39, Tuesday 21 October 2025 - last comment - 21:26, Tuesday 28 October 2025(87620)
Sat Amps Modified: Lower Stages MC1, MC2, MC3, PR3, and SR3

WP 12844
ECR E2400330
Modified List T2500232

The following SUS SAT Amps were upgraded per ECR E2400330. Modification improves the whitening stage to reduce ADC noise from 0.05 to 10 Hz.

Suspension Old New OSEM
MC1 M2 S1100182 S1100148 ULLLURLR
MC1 M3 S1100176 S1100135 ULLLURLR
MC3 M2 S1100069 S1100106 ULLLURLR
MC3 M3 S1100123 S1100093 ULLLURLR
PR3 M2 S1100063 S1000274 ULLLURLR
PR3 M3 S1100113 S1000277 ULLLURLR
MC2 M2 S1100110 S1100169 ULLLURLR
MC2 M3 S1000294 S1100174 ULLLURLR
SR3 M2 S1100105 S1100146 ULLLURLR
SR3 M3 S1100074 S1100134 ULLLURLR

F. Clara, J. Kissel, O. Patane

Comments related to this report
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:19, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87816)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1100148, assigned to MC1 M2's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1100148_MC1_M2_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
MC1 M2 S1100148 CH1 UL 0.0949:5.19 120.3 zpk([5.19],[0.0949],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.0961:5.24 120.5 zpk([5.24],[0.0961],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0962:5.25 120.5 zpk([5.25],[0.0962],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0967:5.27 120.375 zpk([5.27],[0.0967],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1100148_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:21, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87817)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1100135, assigned to MC1 M3's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1100135_MC1_M3_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
MC1 M3 S1100135 CH1 UL 0.0955:5.21 120.25 zpk([5.21],[0.0955],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.0962:5.25 120.25 zpk([5.25],[0.0962],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0973:5.31 120.125 zpk([5.31],[0.0973],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.097:5.3 120.125 zpk([5.3],[0.097],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1100135_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:21, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87818)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1100106, assigned to MC3 M2's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1100106_MC3_M2_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
MC3 M2 S1100106 CH1 UL 0.0978:5.34 120.25 zpk([5.34],[0.0978],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.096:5.24 120.5 zpk([5.24],[0.096],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0973:5.32 120.125 zpk([5.32],[0.0973],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0955:5.21 120.5 zpk([5.21],[0.0955],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1100106_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:22, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87819)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1100093, assigned to MC3 M3's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1100093_MC3_M3_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
MC3 M3 S1100093 CH1 UL 0.0966:5.28 120.0 zpk([5.28],[0.0966],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.099:5.4 120.375 zpk([5.4],[0.099],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0969:5.3 120.0 zpk([5.3],[0.0969],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0966:5.28 120.125 zpk([5.28],[0.0966],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1100093_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:23, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87820)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1000274, assigned to PR3 M2's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1000274_PR3_M2_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
PR3 M2 S1000274 CH1 UL 0.0947:5.17 120.25 zpk([5.17],[0.0947],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.0961:5.24 120.25 zpk([5.24],[0.0961],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0963:5.26 120.0 zpk([5.26],[0.0963],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0962:5.25 120.25 zpk([5.25],[0.0962],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1000274_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:24, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87821)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1000277, assigned to PR3 M3's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1000277_PR3_M3_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
PR3 M3 S1000277 CH1 UL 0.0962:5.26 120.0 zpk([5.26],[0.0962],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.0948:5.17 120.5 zpk([5.17],[0.0948],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0941:5.12 120.5 zpk([5.12],[0.0941],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0958:5.23 120.25 zpk([5.23],[0.0958],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1000277_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:24, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87822)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1100169, assigned to MC2 M2's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1100169_MC2_M2_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
MC2 M2 S1100169 CH1 UL 0.0976:5.34 120.25 zpk([5.34],[0.0976],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.0964:5.26 120.25 zpk([5.26],[0.0964],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0955:5.21 120.25 zpk([5.21],[0.0955],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0973:5.31 120.2 zpk([5.31],[0.0973],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1100169_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:25, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87823)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1100174, assigned to MC2 M3's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1100174_MC2_M3_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
MC2 M3 S1100174 CH1 UL 0.0993:5.43 120 zpk([5.43],[0.0993],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.0969:5.3 120 zpk([5.3],[0.0969],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0951:5.2 120 zpk([5.2],[0.0951],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0952:5.2 120 zpk([5.2],[0.0952],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1100174_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:25, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87824)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1100146, assigned to SR3 M2's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1100146_SR3_M2_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
SR3 M2 S1100146 CH1 UL 0.0968:5.29 120.0 zpk([5.29],[0.0968],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.0989:5.4 120.0 zpk([5.4],[0.0989],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0948:5.18 120.0 zpk([5.18],[0.0948],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0966:5.27 120.25 zpk([5.27],[0.0966],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1100146_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 21:26, Tuesday 28 October 2025 (87825)

Here's the characterization data and fit results for S1100134, assigned to SR3 M3's ULLLURLR OSEMs.

This sat amp is a UK 4CH sat amp, D0900900 / D0901284. The data was taken per methods described in T080062-v3, using the diagrammatic setup shown on PAGE 1 of the Measurement Diagrams from LHO:86807.

The data was processed and fit using ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Scripts/
plotresponse_S1100134_SR3_M3_ULLLURLR_20251020.m

Explicitly, the fit to the whitening stage zero and pole, the transimpedance feedback resistor, and foton design string are:

Optic  Stage  Serial_Number  Channel_Number  OSEM_Name  Zero_Pole_Hz  R_TIA_kOhm  Foton_Design 
SR3 M3 S1100134 CH1 UL 0.0975:5.32 120.0 zpk([5.32],[0.0975],1,"n")
      CH2 LL 0.0958:5.23 120.0 zpk([5.23],[0.0958],1,"n")
      CH3 UR 0.0958:5.22 120.375 zpk([5.22],[0.0958],1,"n")
      CH4 LR 0.0985:5.38 120.25 zpk([5.38],[0.0985],1,"n")

The attached plot and machine readable .txt file version of the above table are also found in ${SusSVN}/trunk/electronicstesting/lho_electronics_testing/satamp/ECR_E2400330/Results/
2025-10-20_UKSatAmp_S1100134_D0901284-v5_fitresults.txt

Per usual, R_TIA_kOhm is not used in the compensation filter -- but after ruling out an adjustment in the zero frequency (by zeroing the phase residual at the lowest few frequency points), Jeff nudged the transimpedance a bit to get the magnitude scale within the ~0.25%, shown in the attached results. Any scaling like this will be accounted for instead with the absolute calibration step, i.e. Side Quest 4 from G2501621, a la what was done for PR3 and SR3 top masses in LHO:86222 and LHO:84531 respectively.

Non-image files attached to this comment
Displaying reports 341-360 of 85662.Go to page Start 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 End