TITLE: 02/12 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY: HAM1 work continues, HAM7 is pumping down.
LOG:                                                                                                                             

18:15 UTC HAM7 SEI SW watchdog trip from a H7 crash, FE & ADC errors on IOPSUSH7 SUSFC1, SUSSQZIN SUSAUXH7, IPC and DK error on SEIH7.

Dave restarted everything ~20 minutes later

Following alog 89115, we found that the old batch crystal from that alog (S/N10252003) had a big chip at one corner. It is pretty bad we don't want to use that.

Betsy found another old batch (S/N10252007, "inspected 12/21/11" and UF tag dated 4/21/09), so we A-B-ed that one with the spare new batch (S/N B1913108).

The beam path was made as level as possible at 3" height using a beam leveling tool (a black metal thing with a tiny aperture at each inch of height).

We put the crystal on a platform that is roughly 2" 29/32 (which is about 2.4mm lower than 3"). The crystal is 4x4x40mm so that's about the right height.

We spent some time to make YAW alignment as good as we can for each of the crystals.

We scanned the beam in PIT from top to bottom (or bottom to top), each extreme is where the beam is almost clipped (but not actually clipped) by the top or the bottom face of the crystal.

Look at the attached, the new batch (left column) clearly shows multiple beams even though the focus is not as sharp as the old batch photos. As we misalign in PIT, the dark place moves relative to the main beam and the contrast changes too, but multiple ghost never went away. At the extrema (very close to the top or bottom edge) it looked as if the beam is better but I'm not sure it actually was.

The old batch (right) didn't show such a behavior. The beam shows something like a diffraction pattern but no separate ghost beams. Everything moved with the main beam.  Not sure if the diffraction pattern came from the aluminum surface or EOM, but clearly this is MUCH better than the new batch.

Note, due to the apparatus (the steering mirror is 20" upstream of the EOM), we haven't searched in a huge PIT angle space, it's actually roughly +-4mrad or so, the angle is not negligible but it's more parallel displacement scan than an angle scan.

Also note, when the crystal was put in place it seems that there's some vertical deflection which was different for the old and the new. On the top two pictures, there's no change in the input alignment into the crystal. 

Based on this observation, I'd say using the old batch makes sense. LHO people (Jennie, Rahul, Betsy and myself) had a brief conversation with Masayuki and MichaelL and we all agreed that that's the way to go.

J. Kissel

After conferring with Sina about the results from LHO:89047 and armed with the plan described at the tail end of LHO:89099, went into the optics lab to improve the rapid iteration of beam waist diameter measurement by concocting an optical layout that can measure the beam at two z positions at the same time.

See attached diagram and physical setup.

Note -- the optical table has become over populated with in-vac EOM crystal characterization (and additional beam-scanning set up), so Keita and I shared space by having his setup be at 3 inch beam height and me at 4.5 inch setup. This just barely cleared his beam scan, so I intend to further increase my beam height to 5 inches.

I only have preliminary results (without having changed the collimator lens position at all yet), but they showed hints of astigmatism, so I suspect:
    - the polarization of the emitted beam from the fiber collimator
    - the beam splitters
    - clipping on the beam scan from Keita's setup.

Will confer with the team.

I ran the chilled water pumps at the Mid stations this morning to exercise the bearings and seals. This will affect the temperature trending of the glycol loops but this is expected. 

Wed Feb 11 10:11:01 2026 INFO: Fill completed in 10min 58secs

at 10:11 all the models on h1sush7 stopped with ADC timeouts. Most probably due to rack work on the Mech Rm Mez.

At 10:33 I verified that all the IO Chassis cards were visible on the bus and restarted the models. I cleared the HAM7 SWWD, it had tripped h1iopseih7.

TITLE: 02/11 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
    Wind: 9mph Gusts, 7mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.21 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

• I saw a few baby elk running together on the LIGO side of route 10 about a half mile before site
• More HAM 1 checks, JAC EOM...
• HAM7 pumpdown continues

(Jordan V., Travis S., Gerardo M.)

Pumpdown was restarted this morning around 9:11 am local time.  After pressure inside HAM7 reached 0.5 Torr we switched over to the turbo, we had a very smooth transition.  After the internal pressure of HAM7 reached 5.0x10^-05 Torr all O-ring isolation valves were closed (we have one at the turbo pump, another at the chamber and one more at the relay tube).
HAM7 internal pressure after 12+ hours of pumping is 5.2x10^-06 Torr.  The attached plot has a small glitch at the 10 hour mark, likely due to the DAQ restart.

Annulus ion pump update.  The ion pump controller was turned on this morning, the ion pump controller struggled for some time as it was railed, but we did noticed that the pressure reading reported by the aux-cart (aux-cart remains connected and pumping on this system) dropped very slow, but after a some minutes the ion pump controller was not railed no more.

It took much longer than expected but we set up the beam path for the RTP test in the OSB optics lab.

Since more power makes it easier to see the ghost beams, I removed the beam dump that used to receive most of the red power (~530mW) and directed the beam to the front of the table (red path in the attached). I stole the steering mirror that used to be used for the low power P-pol path (circled in red). The low power p-pol path is now simply blocked. No other change was made to low power S-pol path (orange) as well as green path (green), but the beams are blocked by beam dumps. If you want to use these, simply unblock.

The beam radius will be 300~400 um or so at the location we plan to put the RTP (represented by a green rectangle in the second attachment). Elenna will post the plot of the beam size measurement.

The third picture shows the containers for different RTP. Left is the one for the crystal in HAM1. The middle seems to be from the same batch. Right looks different, on the bottom of the container there's a label saying "I/O something something 2017" so this is likely the old one.

We didn't have time to actually test the crystals, wait for tomorrow's udpate.

Cables have been staged in front of the TCSX table enclosure on the floor. As this is a trip hazard, the area is tapped off with caution tape. Cables will be removed/pulled tomorrow.

On Friday, Oli and I moved four HRTSes over to their dedicated desicant cabinet in the VPW. Serial numbers 01 - H1BHDL1, 08 - H1BHDBS1, 03 - H1BHDBS2, and 04 - L1 Spare. These suspensions are locked with their wires tension relieved, the flags, magnets, magnet spacers, and BOSEMs have all been removed. We were already planning on moving them over but upon finding some corrosion on two parts we moved up that time frame. The two parts are D1900350 and D2100059, which are respectively the BOSEM Adj Mechanism Cams (12 per SUS), and the Top Mass Magnet Spacers (12 per SUS). The findings are discussed in FRS 36538 for the spacers and 36627 for the cams. I looked over and replaced the worst looking BOSEM cams before wrapping and bagging these suspensions.

We loaded them up into individual pelican cases (two at a time, there's two good pelican cases with padding), padded them as if we were going to ship them, loaded them into a site car then drove them from the staging building to the VPW. There we carefully unloaded them, brought them inside, unpacked and transfered them to the desicant cabinets. We did this twice for four total suspensions.

WP13018 Upgrade h1oaf0 18bit-DAC to 20bit-DAC

Fil, Oli, Anamaria, Robert, Ryan S, EJ, Dave:

We replaced the first DAC in h1oaf0 (a 18bit-DAC) with a 20bit-DAC. We reused the IO Chassis ribbon cable and Interface card, they are identical for these types of DAC.

This DAC is only being used by the PEM model.

A new h1iopoaf0 model was installed with the DAC change, its INI file was not changed.

A new h1pemcs model was installed with several changes:

 . All 8 DAC channels are now being driven (previously last channel was not driven)

 . An excitation stage was added to the model, a copy from LLO's PEM models. This comprises two Oscillators and a Noise_generator (see medm below)

 . An additional DACOUTF filter bank as added just prior to the DAC part, each with a x4 filter in the FM10 slot.

A DAQ restart was required.

Attached image shows H1PEM_CS_DAC_DRIVES_CUST.adl MEDM which maps the excitation path from OSC/NOISE_GEN through the filters for each DAC channel. Note on DACOUTF, each FM10 has a 20BitDAC filter, which is a x4 gain.

As an example, image shows chan0 being driven by a 0.1Hz sine wave with amp=1.0. The image is caught when the input is 0.988, but the DAC_chan0 drive is 3.953.

Recovery of PSL camera images.

Fil, Corey, Dave:

Following the replacement of camera power supplies, I recovered the PSL cameras and quad video server images.

DAQ Restart

Dave:

The DAQ was restarted for the h1pemcs model change. There were no problems with this restart.

(Jordan V., Travis S., Betsy W., Richard M., Gerardo M.)

We inspected all the viewports currently installed on HAM7, inspection was done to verify the serial number on the viewports or viewport assembly.
Most viewports passed visual inspection, however we did note that one viewport assembly on port A2F3 has some blemishes, they are located on the glass of the assembly on both, air and vacuum side.  We asked others for a second opinion, we decided to leave current viewport assembly in place and replace it on the next vent.  This particular viewport was inspected "recently" by others, see aLOG entry.

-Y door viewports:
Port A1F2 a ZV-800 serial number R144, nothing noted.
Port A1F1 a ZV-800 serial number R134, nothing noted.

+Y door viewports;
Port A2F1 has a ZV-800 serial number R146, nothing noted.
Port A2F2 has a ZV-800 serial number R109, nothing noted.  Side note, this viewport has a AR1064 coating.
Port A2F3 has a D1100999, high quality  non-wedged 6" viewport.  Serial number 011.  Some blemishes on the air side of the glass, located around 12 O'clock.  Blemishes vacuum side of the glass, located around 2:30 to 3:30 O'clock.
Port A2F4 has a D1100999, high quality  non-wedged 6" viewport.  Serial number 022, nothing noted.

Jenne Drigger, Sheila Dwyer, Jennie Wright and Oli in chamber

The IMC guardian is now working when we put 3W into HAM1.  Jenne held the output of MC2 M1 length drive, because that has not been working.  We also edited the ISC_library is_locked(IMC function), by lowering the threshold used when the input power is above 2W.  Since the IMC transmission has since improved it could probably be put back. 

We engaged the WFS DOF1+2 which use MC refl WFS, and offloaded them.  We then saw that we are well off center in MC2 trans P + Y, which were well centered on our reference time of 11:25 UTC Dec 3rd. 

Jenne Driggers moved the IMs to match the top mass osems to the values from 89068.  We also noticed that the whitening gain on IM4 trans was changed to 0Db (should be 18dB), making the power seem low in 89046.  

Jennie and Oli are still working in chamber, so these numbers are still changing. 

Tony and myself are here at EX finishing up the EX ES measurement.
We did find that the excitations were turned on at GPS time: 1454787583, but no excitations came through the channel PCAL_EX_SUM_MON until after we were finished.
We did however have to restart a measurement due to a gap in the data. measurement #7 Both beams on the Working standard inside the RX module.
What we did not realize until after, was that at the time the gap happened the excitation switch INJ_MASTER_SW was turned back on and remained on for the remainder of the measurement. 

Also Note: 
PCAL laser here at End X is shuttered inside the TX module. The shutter control is turned to Local and intentionally closed, because we have stolen the RX sensor for lab measurements.


anthony.sanchez@cdsdell428: python generate_measurement_data.py --WS PS4 --date 2026-02-09
Reading in config file from python file in scripts
../../../Common/O4PSparams.yaml
PS4 rho, kappa, u_rel on 2026-02-09 corrected to ES temperature 299.7 K :
-4.701132373259706 -0.0002694340454223 2.8588448124243135e-05
Copying the scripts into tD directory...
Connected to h1daqnds1
martel run
reading data at start_time:  1454784870
reading data at start_time:  1454785410
reading data at start_time:  1454785815
reading data at start_time:  1454786310
reading data at start_time:  1454786835
reading data at start_time:  1454787210
reading data at start_time:  1454787660
reading data at start_time:  1454788220
reading data at start_time:  1454788740
Ratios: -0.46019480202307234 -0.46642274644534126
writing nds2 data to files
finishing writing
Background Values:
bg1 =        9.788561; Background of TX when WS is at TX
bg2 =        4.347145; Background of WS when WS is at TX
bg3 =        9.849034; Background of TX when WS is at RX
bg4 =        4.403818; Background of WS when WS is at RX
bg5 =        9.795756; Background of TX
bg6 =        0.716216; Background of RX

The uncertainty reported below are Relative Standard Deviation in percent 

Intermediate Ratios
RatioWS_TX_it      = -0.460195;
RatioWS_TX_ot      = -0.466423;
RatioWS_TX_ir      = -0.454775;
RatioWS_TX_or      = -0.461187;
RatioWS_TX_it_unc  = 0.087118;
RatioWS_TX_ot_unc  = 0.081615;
RatioWS_TX_ir_unc  = 0.080454;
RatioWS_TX_or_unc  = 0.079252;
Optical Efficiency
OE_Inner_beam                      = 0.988331;
OE_Outer_beam                      = 0.989282;
Weighted_Optical_Efficiency        = 0.988806;

OE_Inner_beam_unc                  = 0.054963;
OE_Outer_beam_unc                  = 0.053369;
Weighted_Optical_Efficiency_unc    = 0.076611;

Martel Voltage fit:
Gradient      = 1636.958979;
Intercept     = 0.082747;

 Power Imbalance = 0.986647;

Endstation Power sensors to WS ratios::
Ratio_WS_TX                        = -1.079194;
Ratio_WS_RX                        = -1.393794;

Ratio_WS_TX_unc                    = 0.051228;
Ratio_WS_RX_unc                    = 0.200042;

=============================================================
============= Values for Force Coefficients =================
=============================================================

Key Pcal Values :
GS           =      -5.135100; Gold Standard Value in (V/W)             
WS           =      -4.701132; Working Standard Value             

costheta     =      0.988362; Angle of incidence
c            =      299792458.000000; Speed of Light
             
End Station Values : 
TXWS         =        -1.079194; Tx to WS Rel responsivity (V/V)
sigma_TXWS   =        0.000553; Uncertainity of Tx to WS Rel responsivity (V/V)
RXWS         =        -1.393794; Rx to WS Rel responsivity (V/V)
sigma_RXWS   =        0.002788; Uncertainity of Rx to WS Rel responsivity (V/V)

e            =        0.988806; Optical Efficiency
sigma_e      =        0.000758; Uncertainity in Optical Efficiency

Martel Voltage fit : 
Martel_gradient         =        1636.958979; Martel to output channel (C/V)
Martel_intercept   =        0.082747; Intercept of fit of     Martel to output (C/V)

Power Loss Apportion : 
beta          =        0.998895; Ratio between input and output (Beta)  
E_T          =        0.993838; TX Optical efficiency 
sigma_E_T          =        0.000381; Uncertainity in TX Optical efficiency 
E_R          =        0.994937; RX Optical Efficiency 
sigma_E_R          =        0.000381; Uncertainity in RX Optical efficiency 

Force Coefficients : 
FC_TxPD          =        7.890432e-13; TxPD Force Coefficient 
FC_RxPD          =        6.178607e-13; RxPD Force Coefficient 
sigma_FC_TxPD          =        5.070187e-16; TxPD Force Coefficient 
sigma_FC_RxPD          =        1.259006e-15; RxPD Force Coefficient 
data written to ../../measurements/LHO_EndX/tD20260210/