J. Kissel, T. Sadecki

New measured values for open light current for most of the OSEMs on H1SUSITMX.


   OSEM    Open Light Current    OSEMINF      OSEMINF
                [ADC ct]                     Offset            Gain
                                                 - OLC / 2     30000 / OLC
M0
    F1        17900                        -8949.9        1.676
    F2        23134                        -11567         1.2968
    F3        23379                        -11689         1.2832
    LF        19955                         -9977.4       1.5034
    RT        21326                          -10663       1.4068
    SD        18719                         -9359.3       1.6027

R0
    F1      21459                          -10730        1.398
    F2      22093                          -11046        1.3579
    F3      24675                          -12337        1.2158
    LF      25215                          -12608        1.1898
    RT     24036                          -12018         1.2481
    SD      23274                          -11637        1.289

UIM
   UL        27099                          -13549      1.1071
   LL        24165                          -12083      1.2414
   UR        27323                          -13662      1.098
   LR        24661                          -12331      1.2165

While the h1fw0/h1ldasgw0 system was being upgraded yesterday from SATABOY to E18 RAIDs, h1nds0 had been switched over to serving h1fw1's data.

Now that the E18 has 21 hours of data acquired, I have switched h1nds0 back to serving this data to permit testing of the new system.

The default nds is h1nds1, but for any nds clients which are hard coded to get data from h1nds0, please be advised that their lookback will only go back to 18:00 PDT Wednesday.

Did all the damping installs possible without making a chamber entry or moving SR2.

The north side Corner3 Broadband Blade and Flexure Dampers are installed.  The north side Corner1 horizontal and vertical GS13 can dampers are also installed.  On the south side, the Corner2 horizontal GS13 can damper is installed.  So 5 of 12 items complete.  The SR2 will have to be undogged and moved NW several mm to allow access to the top wall bolts. Chamber entry will be required on both the west and east sides for the remainder of damping installations.  With the final two blade spring access walls out and the broadband dampers in place, B&K hammering can be done to tune the TMDs.  Then all the walls can be remounted.  All remaining (and spare) damping material is wrapped up on the north side table in the cleanroom.

WP7162 Daniel, Richard, Sheila, Dave:

I modified the h1omc.mdl model to conform to the new DAC channel layout on h1lsc0, as defined by T1100472_v21. The OMC was originally using the first two channels of the 16bit-DAC for the PZT_DITHER and PZT_DRIVE signals. In the new scheme, SQZ uses the first 8 DAC channels, and the OMC uses the last block of 4 channels. Attached image shows model change and snipet of the dcc doc.

h1omc was rebuilt and all h1lsc0 models were restarted.

I had previously fixed a typo in the omclsc.mdl model which had a erroneous space in the DAQ channel block:

CAL-LINE_SUM *

                     ^ space here

which the RCG interpreted as units = *

This is the first restart of h1omc since my fix, so the DAQ and the FEC are reporting different checksums for H1OMC.ini. This will be resolved on the next DAQ restart.

alog entry for 10/17/2017

Patrick and Daniel reported communication errors with EtherCAT corner station slow controls chassis (10/17/2017). Found bad EK1101 coupler in EtherCAT corner station chassis 5, S1200555.

I added 250mL to the Xtal chiller. The level was between Min and Max.

TITLE: 10/19 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: 16mph Gusts, 12mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.05 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.58 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

uSei is over the 90%ile mark

Following the FMCS work earlier this afternoon the cell phone alarm texter code had stopped running. Before restarting it, I took the opportunity to remove John from the list of alarm recipients.

The Y arm vacuum adjacent to the LVEA is slightly elevated over its alarm set point of 5.0e-9 (it is 6.3e-9) so this alarms will be re-sent.

WP7161 Dan, Dave:

Dan has completed the install of the new E-18-0 on h1ldasgw0. We created the top level directories needed by daqd (owned by user controls) and started the daqd process. All is looking good so far.

The RAID upgrade has increased the disk space available to the frame writer from 37TB (two SATABOYS) to 77TB (one E-18).

Tomorrow I'll work on getting the wiper script installed, wont need it for a while though.

The remainder of the FMCS channels have been migrated from the IOC on h0epics to the new BACnet IOC on fmcs-epics-cds. I have stopped the FMCS IOC on h0epics. There is now just the IOC running on fmcs-epics-cds. I have updated the wiki instructions. Dave updated the channels in the DAQ and the autoBurt.req file. The corner station MEDM screens still need some updating. There are some invalid channels that need further investigation.

Sheila, Dave:

at 16:18 PST I restarted the DAQ to:

use the latest H1EDCU_ECATC1PLC2.ini

use the latest H1EDCU_ECATC1PLC4.ini

use the latest H0EDCU_FMCS.ini

add the model h1sqz to the DAQ for the first time

h1fw0 did not participate in this DAQ restart, it was being held offline for its RAID upgrade.

Following the DAQ restart I restarted the h1sqz model. It did not start, it is attempting to use DAC channels currently being used by h1omc. We will investigate this tomorrow, for now h1sqz is being left in its disabled state.

H0EDCU_FMCS.ini:

added:

+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE1A_E_DEGC]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE1A_E_DEGF]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE1A_F_DEGC]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE1A_F_DEGF]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE4_G_DEGC]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE4_G_DEGF]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE4_H_DEGC]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE4_H_DEGF]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE5_I_DEGC]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE5_I_DEGF]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE5_J_DEGC]
+[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_ZONE5_J_DEGF]
 

removed:

-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_COOLVALVE_1]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_COOLVALVE_2]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_COOLVALVE_3]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_COOLVALVE_4]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_DAMPER_1]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_DAMPER_2]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_PITCH_VANE_1]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_PITCH_VANE_2]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_PITCH_VANE_3]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_AH_PITCH_VANE_4]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_HEATER_ZONE1A]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_HEATER_ZONE1B]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_HEATER_ZONE2A]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_HEATER_ZONE2B]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_HEATER_ZONE3A]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_HEATER_ZONE3B]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_HEATER_ZONE4]
-[H0:FMC-CS_LVEA_HEATER_ZONE5]
-[H0:FMC-CS_OSB_AH_COOLVALVE_5]
-[H0:FMC-CS_OSB_AH_COOLVALVE_6]
-[H0:FMC-CS_OSB_AH_HEATINGCOIL_10]
-[H0:FMC-CS_OSB_AH_HEATINGCOIL_9]
-[H0:FMC-MILLIAMP_MAXVAL]
 

J. Kissel

I've created analysis scripts that take pre-measured DTT transfer functions of the OFI suspension and compares them against the model and previous measurements, similar to what's in place for all other suspension types. The new scripts live here:
    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OFIS/Common/MatlabTools/
       plotOFIS_dtttfs_M1.m   << processes single DTT transfer function into a standard format, shows cross-coupling and EUL drived to OSEM sensed transfer functions 
       plotallofis_tfs_M1.m   << compares as many measurements as possible against a standard model  

The resulting plots are attached.
In summary -- still plenty of work to do to understand the actuated OFI!

Measurement Details:
The set transfer functions shown, 2017-10-13 (from LHO aLOG 39033), are with the eddy current damping magnets completely backed off, and the drive-chain is using that of OM1 (a 20 Vpp / 16 bit  DAC, a HAM-A driver, AOSEMs for coils, and 3 DIA x 6 LEN [mm] magnets), and the sensing chain is as designed (AOSEM, US SatAmp, 16 bit / 40 Vpp ADC).

Calibration Details:
You'll note that the scale factors for the L-to-L and Y-to-Y measured transfer functions don't match the model. I think that the T-to-T TF matching the model is a coincidence. I'm confident I don't yet understand the electronics chain. I'm confident it's something in the electronics because the scale factor is the same above and below the resonance for each of the flawed model DOFs (and I've manipulated dynamical parameters and I have to change the parameters to non-sensical values to even come close to "fixing" the problem which doesn't help). 
Here's what I do know:
(1) I have installed calibration filters into the OSEMINF banks of the OFI's sensing chain. These filters have the same gain we've been using for every OSEM since the beginning of time: 0.02333 [um/ct]. While this isn't necessarily accurate, given 
    (a) the use of the US satellite amp, which has a different transimpedance than the UK sat-amps (US = 150e3, UK = 121e3 [V/A]), and
    (b) the UK sat-amps transimpedance gain has changed from 240e3 to 121e3 [V/A] since that number was originally calculated
so, we'll at most gain a factor of (240 / 150) = 1.6 with that correction, BUT -- that should be for all DOFs, so that screws up the T-to-T TFs.
(2) I *didn't,* at the time, have the individual sensors normalized to a "perfect" OSEM with open-light-current of 30000 [ct]. But, having just installed them now, this is at most a ~10% gain discrepancy between sensors.
(3) Though we don't yet have the complete calculation of the force coefficient of the AOSEM coil + 3x6 [mm] magnet combo a. la. T1000164, the only thing not-modeled is the slightly larger radius of the magnet. Thus, we can -- to-first-order -- scale the strength by the change in volume of the magnet as described on pg 4 of G1701519, hence I've used 
    forceCoeff_2x6 = 0.0309;                     % [N/A]; T1000164, T1400030, etc.
    forceCoeff_3x6 = (3.0/2)^2 * forceCoeff_2x6; % [N/A]; G1701519 pg 4 
    forceCoeff_3x6 
        = 0.069525 [N/A]
(4) I'm *assuming* that OM1's HAM-A coil driver is using -v3 of the circuit, in which the output impedance is 1.2k (because of ECR E1201027), so the transconductance gain is 0.988 [mA/V], but I'm only 90% confident. It might be a -v2, and thus be 9.6 [mA/V], but then the data for the *actual* OM1 acceptance wouldn't match so well (e.g. see LHO aLOG 38260).

Model Details
This model matches the frequency and Q of the measured data quite well. I've tweaked the original model's parameter set (see LHO aLOG 12589) to better match the data. The following table describes the differences (remember, x = L, y = T, z = V):
    Param        ofisopt_damp    ofisopt_h1susofi  difference       percent diff    why change?
  Unused global Eddy Current Damping Coefficient
    'bd'         [   0.10898]    [    0.1]         [ -0.0089822]    '-8.24%'        (just to see if the parameter does anything; it doesn't.)
  Moments of Inertia
    'I0x'        [   0.43968]    [  0.475]         [   0.035318]    '8.03%'         to move the yaw mode cross-coupling to match in the L-to-L TF
    'I0y'        [   0.06499]    [  0.065]         [  9.676e-06]    '0.0149%'          (just rounded)
    'I0z'        [   0.47101]    [   0.55]         [   0.078985]    '16.8%'         to lower the yaw mode frequency to match the Y-to-Y TF -- though many things can be manipulated to get this "right"
    'I0xy'       [0.00019696]    [ 0.0002]         [  3.035e-06]    '1.54%'            (just rounded)
    'I0yz'       [-0.0066028]    [-0.0066]         [  2.815e-06]    '-0.0426%'         (just rounded)
    'I0zx'       [  0.002156]    [  0.002]         [-0.00015597]    '-7.23%'           (just rounded)
  Eddy Current damping Coefficients
    'bx0'        [    5.0837]    [    3.5]         [    -1.5837]    '-31.2%'        reduced to increase the Q to match the backed-off ECDs
    'by0'        [       3.7]    [    2.5]         [       -1.2]    '-32.4%'        reduced to increase the Q to match the backed-off ECDs
    'bz0'        [     6.975]    [      7]         [   0.024974]    '0.358%'           (just to see if parameter affects TFs in question; they don't)
    'byaw0'      [   0.47101]    [    0.1]         [   -0.37101]    '-78.8%'        reduced to increase the Q to match the backed-off ECDs
    'bpitch0'    [   0.06499]    [   0.06]         [ -0.0049903]    '-7.68%'           (just to see if parameter affects TFs in question; they don't)
    'broll0'     [   0.43968]    [    0.4]         [  -0.039682]    '-9.03%'           (just to see if parameter affects TFs in question; they don't)
All other parameters (those based on physical dimensions) I've left as is.

Further -- it's still puzzling why the yaw frequency is so high. Original measurements gave a yaw frequency of ~0.4 Hz T1000109, yet both Mark and I show a measured resonance of ~1.039 Hz.

It puts out 1.04W, with the factory settings of 2.149 Amps and 21. degrees C.

WP7161. Dan and Dave:

I ran four pairs of 10Gig multi-mode fibers between the E-18 raid box 0 (fw0) and the following locations:

Q-logic switch in DAQ-1 rack (one pair)

Q-logic switch in DAQ-0 rack (one pair)

h1ldasgw0 (two pairs)

h1fw0 frame writer code was turned off.

h1ldasgw0 (solaris machine, X4270) was powered off. We removed the dual port 10GIG-E card which had been installed as part of the frame writer instability investigation. We installed a dual port fibre-channel card in its place, and Dan re-organized the FC card layout.

We connected both ports of the dual-FC card to the primary FC port on the two controllers on the E-18-0 raid box. We connected the secondary FC ports on these controller cards to one port each on the Q-logic switches, using the ports previously connected directly to h1ldasgw0.

In lieu of a management connection to the E-18-0 controller cards (scheduled for later this week), Dan connected a laptop directly to these units.

An updated DAQ as-built drawing will be available soon.

Since h1fw0 will be 'starting from scratch' writing its frame files, I have transitioned h1nds0 over to serving h1fw1 data in the interim.

As part of the HAM4 install work, we removed and decommissioned the DLC mount shown in the attached drawing: 

D1200984 OPTLEV DLC ASSY

TITLE: 10/18 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:
LOG:

HWS work is still the main activity of the day

15:37 Richard and Fil into the CER

15:45 Richard and Fil out

16:14 Travis out to ITMX

16:45 Dust Monitor 2 is crashed

17:03 Travis out

HWS work

17:05 TJ, John and Aiden heading in to LVEA HAM4

17:10 Lights on at EX

17:18 Jason headed out to BSC1 to help with Hartmann alignment

17:19 Lights off at EX

17:20 Richard tells me the fire panel at EY is acting up HFD is on the way

17:51 Karen and Vanessa heading to MY and then MX

17:48 Dave B restarting NDS1

18:58 Karen and Vanessa heading back to corner

19:00 Jason, Aiden et al are back for lunch

19:56 Peter into the optics lab

21:23 TJ into optics lab and then out to HAM4

21:28 FW0 is down for an upgrade

22:20 Sheila into the LVEA.

22:39 Cheryl out to LVEA to look for a container

22:45 Sheila is going Laser hazard in the squeezer bay. M1700239-v1 is the TSOP for this activity.

[Gregg, Jason, Aidan, TVo, TJ, Jon]

We located the correct Siskiyou 2" mirror mounts (IXM200) for the HAM4 work this morning. Thanks to Corey, who pointed us to two spares that were in the optics lab and were Class A cleaned.

HAM4

Recall that yesterday, we discovered that the 2" mirror mounts that we had been given for mounting the DCBS were DLC mounts, not Siskiyou mounts. The DLC mounts put the optic height 0.5" higher than the Siskiyouu mounts do.

We removed the existing DLC mounts that were added yesterday and removed the dichroic beam splitters (DCBS - T = 300ppm for 1064nm at normal incidence [MI1000]) from these mounts. In doing so, we noted that both DCBS had visible particulates on them. Additionally, the DCBS on the X-arm had a small smudge on the optic and a chip in the barrel. We decided to proceed with the install of the new Siskiyou mounts and assess the action to be taken with the optics after install.

The ITMY laser was turned on again and we were able to use the leakage of this laser through SR2 to align the Y-arm DCBS. We pitched it down a considerable way and confirmed that the reflection from it was dumped on the scraper baffle well below the optical axis.

We adjusted the SR3 alignment to get a ghost beam coming off HWS STEER M1 aligned through the HWSX optics. We installed the new Siskiyou mount on the existing pedestal and noted the height was approximately 6mm higher than neighbouring optics. The pedestal and mount were shifted towards the in-vacuum lens by approximatley 3" (new position is shown in the attached image). Original assembly shown in D1101083-v2.

We centered the DCBS on the laser beam and then adjusted the pitch so that the return beam was dumped on the scraper baffle. For reference, we measured the return beam as it hit HWSX STEER M3 and it was 10mm below the incident beam on that optic. Since the DCBS is approximately 12" away, this puts the reflected beam angle at -1.9 degrees. This put the return beam about 45mm down from center on the HWS SCRAPER BAFFLE.

Conclusion:

The optical mounts are installed and aligned, however, the optics themselves almost certainly need to be cleaned if not replaced. For reference, the HWSX DCBS sees about 300mW of 1064nm light (at about 25W input power into the IFO). The HWSY DCBS sees about 100nW.