Richard, Fil, Dave:
at MY we powered down: h1pemmy front end computer, its IO Chassis, its AA Chassis and both fiber-eth-converters (h1fe and h1daq).
These will remain powered off for the duration of the bake-out.
The interlock test was sucecssful. Both laser used by the squeezer shut down.
Jeff B.,Peter K. Used vacuum to remove water remaining inside the PSL HPO and four diode boxes, which have been disconnected from the cooling system and are being mothballed. Closed WP #7407
NikoL, Rick S
We switched on the the Pcal laser to check the beam pointing after the vibration damper and baffles installation work last week.
We (with Corey's help) pointed the ETM to center the optical level signals.
With this alignment the Pcal spots are way off, more than 1 cm (see attached photo, both beams should be (and were earlier last week) centered on the integrating sphere aperture).
Keita is going to check on the TMS alignment so we can try to discriminate between the possibility that the Pcal periscope shifted during the alignment work and the possibility that the ETM pointing (or OptLev) has changed.
If the ETM pointing is off, it would be on order 10 mm over 10 m, or about 1 mrad.
TravisS, NikoL, RickS
It appears that the Pcal periscope structure moved (top pitched back, away from the ETM) during the "Baffles and Shields" installation.
The attached photos show the spot positions on the ETM target both before (last Wed.) and after (this morning) the installation of the vibration absorbers, Mt. Brackets, and barrel baffle panels.
Also attached is a detail of the Pcal ETM target (D1301014) showing the dimensions of the features on the target.
It appears that the upper beam moved up about 3.5 mm and the lower beam moved right about 3.5 mm.
The gaps between the centers of the upper flexures and the A7 adapter wall were slightly more than 0230". Our goal was to keep them below 0.220". We set them significantly below 0.220" last week (maybe 0.210") but apparently the additional mass of hte hardware added reduced the compression (as expected, see LIGO-T1800047-v2).
This morning I started the ZM1 Guardian node. I had made the code changes for it back with ZM2 (alog40256), so it was just an easy create and start.
It is also on the Guardian overview screen, and while I was there I checked that all nodes were on it. All good!
17:00 Chris to LVEA to inner receiving for scaffold gathering
16:00 Vent meeting
16:36 M2 to MY to move a ladder
17:00 Betsy and Travis out to EY
17:10 Tour group into CR
17:34 Tour group into CR
17:45 Corey sitting in for the remainder of my shift to allow my work in the PSL
VAC - pumping down in the corner station. Bake is going slow at MY
PSL - ongoing 70W installation work. Mode matching into the new amplifier is the plan for today. Camera work in PSL; moving GigE cameras to new locations
SQZ - squeezer work will continue. If there's a break in it SEI will take the advantage to do balancing
SUS - OPO Model work (Tues)
SEI - Target of opportunity work contingent on squeezer work. ISI model changes contingent on ECR
CDS Ele - Access control work will be going on at MY
EX - Extraction of the Quad
EY - Pcal maintenance work this week. Vac work this week. SUS closeout w/doors today.
HVAC- work ongoing in optics lab
HAM6 - Target of opportunity work:
Trends reflect ongoing work during 70W installation.
Laser Status:
SysStat is good
Front End Power is 33.97W (should be around 30 W)
HPO Output Power is -0.04668W
Front End Watch is GREEN
HPO Watch is RED
PMC:
It has been locked 0 days, 0 hr 0 minutes (should be days/weeks)
Reflected power = 0.02522Watts
Transmitted power = -0.02523Watts
PowerSum = -0.001669Watts.
FSS:
It has been locked for 0 days 0 hr and 0 min (should be days/weeks)
TPD[V] = 0.0672V (min 0.9V)
ISS:
The diffracted power is around 3.3% (should be 3-5%)
Last saturation event was 6 days 19 hours and 17 minutes ago (should be days/weeks)
Possible Issues:
FSS TPD is low
LRA out of range, see SYSSTAT.adl
Same issue with invalid json data. Updated channel list attached.
TITLE: 03/12 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
Wind: 4mph Gusts, 2mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.23 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
Attached are the VPW desiccant plots with the last month's added data. Nothing out of the ordinary shown.
Output has been at 100& for days now so this won't impact anything. If situation were different, i.e. were weren't already at 100% output but still ramping up, then this "bug" could have resulted in an over temperature condition. The program is behaving as if the "HOLD" condition is a function of run time based on 1C / hour expected rate of rise and time needed to get to SETPOINT value from measured temperature recorded at start of profile. If so, then this is a novice programmer mistake. The program should switch to the HOLD segment upon reaching the SETPOINT value as a function of the measured temperature irregardless of time so as to always be limited to the 1C / hour maximum rate of rise.
Following on from the driven electric field meter (EFM) measurements presented in alog lho-40878, I've made a rough conversion of the EFM noise floor into meters of DARM. It looks like the EFM might just be sensitive enough to see fields which could contribute to DARM. This calibration is very dodgey and is really just an order-of-magnitude (or 3) estimate. Based on the the transfer function from volts-of-ESD-shield-drive to meters-in-DARM, in alog llo-28675 (strongly dependent on which test mass was looked at), the EFM noise floor lies somewhere between the red and purple traces in the first plot.
How I made this plot:
First I fit our measured electric field strength vs volts of ESD shield drive measurement, to get a conversion from Vshield to electric field strength [V/m] (second plot, data read off the plots in Jeff's previous log post)
I fit Anamaria's transfer functions for mDARM per Vshield as shown in llo-28675. I just did a linear fit and extrapolated it to 500Hz, since their measurements only go to 200Hz.
I converted this transfer function into mDARM per electric field [V/m], using the fit in step 1 (shown in the third plot)
Finally I took the EFM noise floor, and multiplied it by the transfer function (x 5 since we drove all 5 shields where LLO only drove 1) to get the EFM noise floor in mDARM (plot 1).
EFM measurements will continue at EX in the future, we still need to look at the frequency-dependence of the ESD shield electric field, and take measurements where we drive the ESD signal/bias, ISI horizontal actuators, and anything else in-chamber that might generate electric fields.
Estimates I made a while ago when deciding that the smaller electric field meter was not adequate are the sensitivity of the meter had to be 5 e -5 Volts/meter/sqrt(Hz) at 100 Hz to intersect the ambient field noise in the chamber. This required that the test mass had acquired a charge of about 3 e -9 coulombs.
I noticed that the displayed value in the TC1 field was "#..." or absent a numeric value this morning at 0110 hrs. during a random check. I monitored for 10 minutes and noted displayed values as TC1="#..." TC2=85.5 TC4=83.0 %(can't determine due to pixel resolution) TC1="#..." TC2=85.8 TC4=83.2 %(can't determine due to pixel resolution) TC1="#..." TC2=85.7 TC4=83.1 %(can't determine due to pixel resolution) TC1="#..." TC2=85.6 TC4=85.2 %(can't determine due to pixel resolution) TC1=99.9 TC2=85.5 TC4=85.5 %71 TC1="#..." TC2=85.9 TC4=83.3 %76 Thus, displayed value of TC1 is alternating between gibberish and valid values.
Tagging VE.
It appears it doesn't like to read out three whole #s.
MY weather station is also down, suspect turning off DC power supplies in the DAQ rack did this.