[Ethan, Niko]
In response to some raised concerns about PcalX glitching, Ethan and I checked the maximum OFS PD output at both end stations. PcalY is unchanged, and the PcalX maximum PD output has lowered slightly from 8.0 to 7.9. We have reset the PcalX OFS offset from 4.0 to 3.95, and will continue investigations into other potential causes.
Robert, Evan, Anamaria
The peaks in DARM around 280, 550, 850 aand 1100 are coherent with the CS_EBAY_LSCRACK magnetometer. (The power lines are marked separately)
This has been seen before in March, but at the time they went away, even though the magnetometer spectra did not change. The coupling must be highly variable. At the time we had moved the fan power to a completely different power system in the hope that the mechanism was through the shared power of the fans and IO chassis (which acquires DARM).
However, it seems they have returned sometime around May 1st (a Wednesday), and have been in DARM since then, still variable but there nonetheless.
We should check if there were any relevant changes around that time to give us a clue about the coupling mechanism.
GregM recently added the magnetometer to the fscan pages, but it might be nice to go back and recreate the coherences over all of O3.
See example attached from this link: https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~pulsar/fscan/H1/daily/H1Fscan_coherence/fscanNavigation.html
We would like to ask DetChar to look into the behavior of this coupling and its effect on DARM.
To prevent false-positive alarms to cell phones.
Bypass will expire:
Tue Aug 27 15:08:17 PDT 2019
For channel(s):
H0:FMC-CS_WS_RO_ALARM
H0:FMC-CS_CY_H2O_SUP_DEGF
H0:FMC-CS_CY_H2O_PUMPSTAT
H0:FMC-EX_CY_H2O_SUP_DEGF
H0:FMC-EX_CY_H2O_PUMPSTAT
H0:FMC-EY_CY_H2O_SUP_DEGF
H0:FMC-EY_CY_H2O_PUMPSTAT
H0:FMC-CS_FIRE_PUMP_1
H0:FMC-CS_FIRE_PUMP_2
Both the front end laser and the 70 W amplifier power watchdogs were reset.
To address teh CLF power jumps, see alog 51451, we replaced the RF amp, E1700005/serial S1700249, the coupler, E1700035/serial S1700255, and cables, ISC_SQ_32 and ISC_SQ_368_1, with spare units S1700248 and S1700254, and new cables.
There was a piece of yellow electrical tape stuck to the TNC thread of the panel feedthrough. It was removed. The RF opwer monitor changed from 33.7dBm to 34.2dBm, whereas the CLF power currently is 1.43mW.
This didn't fix the CLF power jumps. The CLF power jumps are about the same, so it looks like the effect seen in the RF power monitor has gone down somewhat.
TITLE: 08/27 Owl Shift: 07:00-15:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Preventive Maintenance
INCOMING OPERATOR: Cheryl Patrick
SHIFT SUMMARY: H1 was locked and observing for 9hrs 45 min. 1 GRB - ignored. Quiet shift
LOG:
14:38 Lockloss occurred just before scheduled PEM script
14:46 H1 Observatory mode to Preventative Maintenance ad Sensor Correction turned off
15:00 Handing off to Patrick
Fermi Alert - Trigger Duration 4.096 seconds - IGNORING
No answer from LLO or Virgo on TeamSpeak - Left message of intention to ignore in the TeamSpeak text window.
TITLE: 08/26 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 115Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ed
SHIFT SUMMARY:
Had one lockloss which ended a 30hr lock. Relocking took 2.5+hrs. Would love this to be quicker! Virgo has already started Mainteance.
LOG:
TITLE: 08/27 Owl Shift: 07:00-15:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 114Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_CONF state: WINDY
Wind: 6mph Gusts, 4mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
Lockloss at 2:15 (thus ending 30hrs of being locked & observing).
Green Y-arm and PRMI did not look great afer 30+min of trying to make it work, so just finished up an INITIAL ALIGNMENT and now trying to lock again.
Locking wasn't trivial or timely. Had a few locklosses (logged in my summary), and definitely needed to babysit the ASC steps and also reduce ERROR signals (most recent lock which got us to NLN required a good 30min to babysit ASC! But we are back to Observing finally (after over 2.5hrs of being down).
In January, in alog 46521, I measured directly the angle that PRM could move in yaw before clipping on the CW1 baffle (on the left in the images of CW1), and the angle to move the REFL beam in the -X direction, toward centing the beam on CW1. At that time, it was +200urad to clipping on the +X side of the CW1 baffle aperture, and -1000urad to clearly see the REFl beam near the center of CW1.
I've attached some video of the camera that looks at CW1, and the video shows that the intensity of the IR light changes, ie.e flashes that are birghter. The baffle aperture is 16mm. CW1 is 25mm. The input beam is off center, +X direction, approx. 2mm, and this puts the REFL beam approximately 2mm from the edge of the baffle aperture. There are are also 5-6 beams that come back through the IO Input Faraday, and since the input beam is off center, we can see at least 3 of these that would ideally be block before reaching CW1, but are seen clearly on CW1 and it's baffle.
There are 3 stray beams that are easy to identify:
There is a fringe patter that is above and the the left of the main beam, seen on the edge of the baffle. This is not a typical stray beam, it was not present when the IO Faraday was aligned at air. One source for this beam could be a double reflection coming from the optics in the Faraday Rotator. I have also seen this fringe pattern on AOE2, where REFL comes back through PRM, and is headed to HAM1/ISCT1.
If we assume that the current input optics and input beam from the IMC are the same as in January, then it seems unlikely that REFL itself is clipping on the CW1 baffle, however, with only 200urad of rotation before the REFL clips, it seems like it can't be ruled out.
More likely, the beams that are part way on the CW1 baffle aperture are mvoing on and off of the baffle, and creating the flashes seen on the camera.
While the stray beams are not particularly strong, it seems possible that when the beams move over the edge of the baffle aperture, the scatter from the stray beams, especially those on the left side of the camera image, would scatter directly into the main beam.
I've advocated for centering the beam on CW1 and have never been closer, and of course, this scattering may be deemed unimportant, but given the persistant noise we see on POP and REFL, I thought it important to bring this flashing to a wider audiance.
HAM & BSC CPS: All CPS' look good for high-freq range from attached plots.
Laser Status:
Front End Power is 31.92W (should be around 30 W)
70W Output Power is 70.03W
Front End Watch is GREEN
70W Watch is GREEN
PMC:
It has been locked 4 days, 7 hr 28 minutes (should be days/weeks)
Reflected power = 10.49Watts
Transmitted power = 53.39Watts
PowerSum = 63.88Watts.
FSS:
It has been locked for 1 days 4 hr and 56 min (should be days/weeks)
TPD[V] = 4.283V (min 0.9V)
ISS:
The diffracted power is around 2.2%
Last saturation event was 1 days 4 hours and 57 minutes ago (should be days/weeks)
Attached are trends for oplevs.
NOTE:
Addressed TCS Chillers (23:54-0:01utc)
TITLE: 08/26 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 113Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Jeff
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_CONF state: WINDY
Wind: 10mph Gusts, 8mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
Microseism has been slowy trending down the last 24hrs and all other seismic/wind are quiet.
QUICK SUMMARY:
Got the rundown of H1's status for today and yesterday from JB. H1's been locked/Observing for approaching 27.5hrs with BNS range between 113-119Mpc over the lock (last 4hrs have slowly drifted down from 119 to the current 114Mpc.
L. Sun
The hourly C01 uncertainty budget plots and txt files are stored here https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~ling.sun/Calibration/Uncertainty/O3C01/LHO/
LHO: from 1237827584 == Mar 28 2019 16:59:26 UTC to 1244307456 == Jun 11 2019 16:57:18 UTC
Note: If the detector is not locked or the calibration line uncertainty > 0.005, the results are not produced for that given time. (Results cover 71% of the whole duration.)
The attachment demonstrates that the variation of the envelopes is negligible.
- White dashed curve: median of the median values from all the hourly data
- White solid curve: median of the +/- 1 sigma values from all the hourly data
- Color: percentiles of the +/- 1 sigma curves (i.e., variation of the envelope)
L. Sun,
I've fixed the RRNom.py code to exclude kappa_U and kappa_P correction before 0416 in LHO. On the other hand, I found that some jobs unexpectedly failed due to cluster issues in the previous run. Some of the hourly data were missing. I've regenerated C01 statistics for the whole period. Now the coverage is 77% for LHO.
The updated percentile plot and the max mag/phase bound curves are attached. In the percentile plot, we see larger variation at low freq because kappa_U and kappa_P were not corrected before 0416.
The plots are generated using the script ^/trunk/Common/pyDARM/RRNomStat.py
Sample command: python3 RRNomStat.py --statDir=/home/ling.sun/public_html/Calibration/Uncertainty/O3C01/LHO/ --IFO=LHO --nameTag=O3_C01
L. Sun
The max bound plot in the previous comment shows the max of all statistics. Now it's updated to show the max bounds of different percentiles.
The variation in the uncertainty percentiles seen in the 95th ("2 sigma") and 99th ("3 sigma") from the 68th ("1 sigma") are a result of H1's h(t) not correcting for \kappa_P and \kappa_U during the observational stretched before April 16th, when we didn't trust them enough (see details in FRS Ticket 12997 and associated dependencies).
Why didn't we trust them? In short:
Because ETMX calibration lines used to determine \kappa_U and \kappa_P were too far apart from the PCAL absolute reference line -- and the time-dependent sensing function was varying enough (see 51115 and FRS Ticket 13012) that the approximation that "the calibration lines are close enough that the time variance of the ratio of C/(1+G) at PCAL frequency and each ETMX line is negligible" [see section 2.4 in T1700106] breaks down).
Thus, the (yes, still untrustworthy) measured values of \kappa_P and \kappa_U are applied as a *systematic error* in the uncertainty and error budget, and thus that budget is time-variant, and increasing the 95th and 99th percentile values. This creates an *over-estimate* of the systematic error, as PUM and UIM actuation strengths as measured with frequency dependent sweeps have remained entirely static over the run thus far -- see LHO aLOG 50992 and G1901479. However, we accept this poor assessment as of the time-dependence actuator systematic error as a "conservative" estimate of what it could be (where the GPR covers the unknown static frequency dependence).
After April 16th, we moved all actuator calibration line frequencies lower and much closer to each other (see LHO aLOG 48551).
Attached is supplemental material from Lilli showing what the percentiles look like if O3 uncertainty and systematic error estimates prior to April 16th are *excluded.*
One can see much less variance, and the 95th and 99th percentile curves lie right on top of the 68th percentile curve, as expected.
[Editor's note -- these were sent to calibration mailing list on Aug 27 2019, under thread "To Use or Not to Use: TDCFs for H1 until Apr 16th" -- 2019-08/msg00166.html. Unclear if they were yet put in the repo, but I've committed them to /ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/O3/H1/Results/Uncertainty/, perhaps redundantly, and will remove and delete once I find out if /where they were committed elsewhere .