As part of installing a third DAQ framewriter I have written python code to generate a new DAQ Detail MEDM. It is launched by the DETAIL button on the CDS Overview (see attached).

Note that while FW2 is being tested its entry is a placeholder. When FW2 is put into production, the frames from all three framewriters will be checked to ensure they are identical.

The only difference between the old and new MEDM is that the new shows when the framewriters are actively writing their frame files to disk (the BUSY flag).

At 17:40:57 Wed 23apr2025 PDT (GPS 1429490475) some corner station long-range-dolphin IPC receivers got a single receive error from h1susetmx and h1susetmy senders. This is one error in the 16384 packets received in that second.

The 6 receivers in h1oaf and h1calcs are the only receivers of the h1sus[etmx,etmy] senders but they are not the only receivers of channels being sent from h1sus[ex,ey] frontends (h1sus[etmx,etmy]pi sends to h1omcpi). Nor are they the only receivers of signals coming from the end stations; h1lsc and h1asc receive channels from h1isc[ex,ey].

Because these receive errors were at the same time and symetrical between the two end stations, a glitch in the cdsrfm system is suspected.

TITLE: 04/24 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
    Wind: 3mph Gusts, 1mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.10 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is in PLANNED ENGINEERING for the VENT

Today's planned activities:

• HAM1
  • Cable dressing
  • Install RMs and cable
  • ISC prep
  • Straighten cables
  • Top flange gauge
• HAM 4-5 cable tray work and some craning
• EY wind fence work prep
• HEPI software upgrade
• PCAL at both ends

Work safe!

All 8 pre-filters were swapped out at End-Y AHU-1. Of the 2 Supply Fans, SF-1 was running. The 8 pre-filters on the other side (SF-2) where it wasn't pulling air were still in great condition and left alone. 
Also, all 8 pre-filters were swapped out at End-X AHU-1. Same situation as E-Y. AHU-2 side was not swapped out. The pre-filters still looked near brand new.
Another note worth mentioning is that of the 16 pre-filters that were replaced, the filtration level of each was MERV-12 or MERV-11. They were replaced with 16 new pre-filters that are all MERV-11. This will likely slightly increase the air volume flowing through the unit. 

4-22 (Tuesday) activities:

- After reaching ~1.3E-6 Torr at the corner, GV2 was opened (the corner was valved together with the X-manifold), that brought down the pressure to ~9E-7 Torr in ~2 hours
- The aux carts from GV5, BSC8, and HAM4 have been detached, 2 of them have been staged at HAM1/HAM2 as a preparation for the pumpdown of the annulus volume

4-23 (Wednesday) activities:

- The stiffening frame for the 1000 amu RGA is being built
- The filter elements were replaced in the EX clean air supply, and it is now running for 24 hours, with a vent valve open in the VEA

TITLE: 04/23 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Productive day in which the following tasks were done:

• HAM 1
  • IAS alignment checks - DONE
  • Actuation reattachment work, ISI prep - DONE
  • SEI, IAS cabling - DONE
  • More cabling - Almost done
  • Cable straightening and cable tray
• RANDY - Crane 3IFO flange crate over BT - DONE
• MARC - Post install measurement of RF cables (contd.) - DONE

LOG:

Jonathan, Dave,

We replaced the hardware that is running h2daqfw2 today.  This was done to put in a system that had more memory.  We pulled a spare daq unit out of the test stand (most recently named x6dc0).  While doing that we swapped the memory with a broken daqd system, so that the new h2daqfw2 now has 256GB of ram.  The system is up and running again, I'm tracking the setup in puppet so that we have a low rebuild time.

This was done to support investigating differences between the frames generated on h1daqfw[01] and hqdaqfw2.  I need to be able to run modified versions of daqd to see some of the internal state that is not exposed to be able to understand and fix differences in encoding of the frames.  When I ran daqd on the old hardware, it ran out of memory, even after reducing buffer sizes.

After finishing initial alignment this morning, Mitch and I wrapped up the upgrade of the ISI to A+ spec. The last parts to go on were the vertical stops for the new .25mm vertical CPS and the vertical St0 L4Cs. All the sensors look live now, I will take some more detailed data later. Last pieces to be installed will be some spring tuned mass dampers that have been waiting for me to measure in the staging building for a couple weeks now. 

Tomorrow, I'll help with the cable routing up the ISI, and ISC can start re-installing the optics.

Marc Fil Daniel

We finished the cabling work for the ISC cables between HAM1, ISCT1, and ISC-R1/2/4. This includes re-labeling of all cables that had no or misleading labels.

Preeti, Gaby, Tabata, Debasmita

Summary:

We calculated the duty-cycle of L1 and H1 in O3, O4a and O4b winters (Nov, Dec, and Jan) on each day and plotted with the median of microseismic ground motion in 0.1-0.3 Hz and 0.3-1.0 Hz. The duty-cycle was modified by removing earthquake times (ground motion in the 0.03-0.1 Hz band above 150 nm/sec) from lock duration and day duration.

Conclusion:

• We found the evidence of linear correlation between microseismic ground motion and duty-cycle; except for Hanford O3 and O4a (2023) winters. For Hanford, useismic ground motion affected the duty-cycle in O4b winter (2024-25) only (see figure).
• In L1 O4a winter (2023-24) plot, zero duty-cycles at lower ground motion disappeared in the next winter, which seems to be resolved with the changes in ETM and CRYO BAFFLE during Jan 2024 commissioning break (LIGO-G2400537).
• Negative value of the Pearson coefficients indicate negative linear correlation between them (see the attached table and plots).

After the ITMY transfer functions I posted Monday(84031), there was some discussion by Edgard and Brian about an extra zero on M0 between L and P ~0.27Hz that maybe seems like it's there when the ISI is isolated and now there when the ISI is in Damped (although he later decided that maybe that didn't make much sense 84068). I took some ITMY M0 transfer functions yesterday afternoon with the ISI in Isolated, to check out any possible correlations there.

Looking at the comparison between Monday and yesterday's measurements(pg 13-14), where the only difference was the ISI in Damped vs Fully Isolated, respectively, that difference alone doesn't seem to account for the disappearence of the extra zero. This further backs up the conclusion Edgard came to this morning.

Data (/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGM0/Data/)
2025-04-22_2300_H1SUSITMY_M0_Mono_WhiteNoise_{L,T,V,R,P,Y}_0p01to50Hz.xml
In SVN as r12271

Results (/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGM0/Results/)
2025-04-22_2300_H1SUSITMY_M0_ALL_TFs.pdf
In SVN as r12272

Comparison (/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/Data/)
allquads_2025-04-23_ISI-DampedvFullyIso_Apr212025vApr222025_ALLM0_TFs.pdf
allquads_2025-04-23_ISI-DampedvFullyIso_Apr212025vApr222025_ALLM0_ZOOMED_TFs.pdf
In SVN as r12274

Wed Apr 23 10:08:22 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 8min 19secs

There is a ladder section along the X-arm access road between the mid- and end-stations.

The second attached photo was taken looking toward the mid-station from the direction of the end-station.

Marc Daniel

One of the coax cables shows a discontinuity at the feedthrough, ISC_RF25-B/3. This is the coax for ASC-REFL_B 9MHz chn 4 (Q4 RF Low). This is feedthrough D1-1D1. We can see the signal going though the pig-tail but terminating at the feedthrough. This could be an issue of the in-air pig-tail or the in-vac cable at the  feedthrough side.

Typical In-vacuum RFPD ASC Wiring Chain for aLIGO: https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-D1300467
O5 ISC/SQZ Wiring Diagram: https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-D1900511

Edgard, Brian.

Following up on the fits for the SR3 estimator. I ran the plotall scripts on the transfer functions we took last Friday [see 84003]. Then ran the attached code to fit the transfer functions.

Figure 1 shows the ISI-M1 fitted transfer function. The Q-factors for the fit were tweaked by hand so I could get a decent fit. The exported M1 to M1 transfer function is shown in the second attachment. I decided it should have the same poles as the ISI one, and the gain was fit so the estimator matches the high-frequency behavior of the measured transfer function. The choice to share poles is because the math indicates that it will lead to some potential modeling errors cancelling out.

The pole information for the two filters is:

         Pole              Damping       Frequency      Time Constant  
                                       (rad/seconds)      (seconds)    
                                                                       
 -4.38e-02 + 6.38e+00i     6.86e-03       6.38e+00         2.28e+01    
 -4.38e-02 - 6.38e+00i     6.86e-03       6.38e+00         2.28e+01    
 -7.64e-02 + 1.44e+01i     5.30e-03       1.44e+01         1.31e+01    
 -7.64e-02 - 1.44e+01i     5.30e-03       1.44e+01         1.31e+01    
 -2.97e-02 + 2.13e+01i     1.39e-03       2.13e+01         3.37e+01    
 -2.97e-02 - 2.13e+01i     1.39e-03       2.13e+01         3.37e+01

And the zpk strings (in MATLAB format) are:

ISI to M1:

zpk([-0.068+20.398i,-0.068-20.398i,-0.099+11.454i,-0.099-11.454i,0,0],[-0.03+21.271i,-0.03-21.271i,-0.076+14.435i,-0.076-14.435i,-0.044+6.384i,-0.044-6.384i],-0.75)'

M1 to M1:

zpk([4745.079,-0.089+8.28i,-0.089-8.28i,-0.113+19.058i,-0.113-19.058i],[-0.03+21.271i,-0.03-21.271i,-0.076+14.435i,-0.076-14.435i,-0.044+6.384i,-0.044-6.384i],-0.015)

I did the fits by using the spectrumest function in MATLAB (which is sadly not available in 2019a). The long term plan is to switch to one of the many python fitting tools that people like for the fits. The code is attached to this logpost for bookkeeping

Here's a quick summary of the Estimator installation from this week (Edgard, Oli, Jeff K, Brian L)

slides with basic info: T2500082 
FRS ticket 32526

Installation alogs
Infrastructure installed on HAM2/PR3 and HAM5/SR3, style updates to model, MEDM linked to sitemap - alog 83906

Tools installed in Estimator folder in the SUS SVN alog 83922

We updated the OSEM 10:0.4 calibration filters, but only on SR3 and PR3. alog 83913

Damping filters installed - alog 83926

Tested the fader switch - alog 83982

Designed and installed a blend for SR3 Yaw (DBL_notch in the first filter bank) - alog 84004

Created a new OSEM calibration script - alog 84005
(Edgard is thinking about a general version of this using Python, that is still TBD)

Fitting is well underway, but isn't done yet.

We made much more progress than we expected - thanks Oli and Jeff for all the help. It's not quite ready to go, we need to install the TF fits for the model.

We might have actually been able to test, except the temperature changes from the pumpdown were causing the SR3 optic to move, and the TFs were not very stable. Edgard is working on a log to document this. We have good fits for SR3 yaw taken Friday morning, and we might just try these remotely with Oli's help. We do plan to get a clean set of TFs in a few days when things have stabilized.

-- notes for next steps, thanks to Sheila for this --

We plan to leave the SR3 overall yaw damping gain at -0.5. This means we'll set the 'light damping' to -0.1  and the gain in the estimator to -0.4. Edgard used -0.1 for the fitting, but he notes that the Q's are pretty high so we may need to revisit this.

SR3 oplev channels are : H1:SUS-SR3_M3_OPLEV_{PIT,YAW}_OUT_DQ

Some interesting alogs about the impact of changes to SR damping: alog 72106 and 72130  

Elenna's PR3 coherence plots: alog 65495