J. Kissel, D. Barker, R. McCarthy As was done with RMs last week (see LHO aLOG 38883) I've re-populated the EPICs records and foton filters for H1 SUS OM1, OM2, and OM3 after having moved them over from the old h1sushtts.mdl front end model to the h1susomc model. Having reminded myself of all that was needed with the RMs (including DAMP and COILOUTF gains), I believe I've covered all bases. Several Things of Note: - I've gone back to the RM_OVERVIEW and HSSS_OVERVIEW screens because the GDS_TP screen was incorrectly still pointing to the H1SUSHTTS GDS TP screen of the OMs. So, I created a new macro variable MASTERMODEL (and lowercase mastermodel) in all of the HSSS macro files (rmall, omall, imall, and each individual file). - We also have compiled and installed the new h1susauxh56 to pick up all the new SUS' coil driver monitoring. - I have NOT yet updated / created a new safe.snap for the h1susomc model that includes the OMs. - I have not bothered to restore alignment offsets. In-air cabling and electronics (re)install for OMs is not yet complete -- in addition to the front-end / IO chassis ADC and DAC card shuffle, which is complete -- the OMs' feedthrough exit out of HAM6 are getting re-arranged to make room for all the new SQZ elements in HAM6 and the former in-air cabling is just ~10 ft. too short. As such, we won't get the chance to confirm /test that all the digital infrastructure has been restored properly until that stuff gets finished.
With GregG in chamber and JimW helping outside, the installation of the ViewPort onto the -X most Septum Window was pretty straight forward. A new o-ring was used and the window/flange clocking mark was put at 9o'clock (-X) and was torqued in three steps to 16 ft-lbs. Attached photo shows these men in action.
Numbers from packaging: D1101092 SN #3, O-Ring Parker #2-373 C100002
Added 250ml water to the PSL crystal chiller. Diode chiller water levers were OK. Both filters look good as well.
Went over items on the White Board. Monday is piled on because it both has items which carry on through the week and also tends to have items carrying on from previous week. Below are some items I was able to jot down some notes for:
Re broken glass, see alog:
https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=38918
Nothing unusual considering the work being done. There is a slow chiller leak that is being addressed.
VBOD bake and LVEA purge air (KOBELCO) - all good.
IMC alignment was refined a bit as it changed. We used MC1 and MC3.
The beam with the correct polarization is clearing Faraday.
Used IM3 to center the beam on PRM iris, IM4 to center on PR2 iris, iterate.
The reflection from PRM was centered on the REFL baffle between HAM2 and HAM1 by tweaking PRM.
Misaligned PRM to steer the REFL beam on the high power beam dump through the viewport baffle on top of HAM2. Pro tips:
Attached shows the alignment sliders for things as of now and good "misaligned" offset for PRM.
LVEA is laser safe. Tools and irises and such are still in HAM2 and HAM3.
LVEA is laser safe.
A. Bell, J. Oberling, T. Sadecki
ITMx has been successfully hung as a newly welded monolithic. I'll leave it to Jason to post the actual numbers, but the PUM to TM differential pitch better than the old version of ITMx. Now to put it back together in chamber next week.
Final alignment numbers for the new monolithic are below. All measurements were done with the ITMx suspended, PUM and UIM locked. All directions assume the reader is looking in the +X direction (i.e. at the ITMx AR surface); it should be noted for future reference (if comparing to the numbers in the alignment notebook) that this is opposite the convention used in the alignment notebook, which is set relative to the IAS equipment used in the alignment and looks in the -X direction (at the ITMx HR surface).
The serial numbers of the fibers used and their locations in the monolithic are as follows:
WP7162. Jeff, Arnab, Dave:
Arnab and I installed a 6th ADC card into h1susauxh56's IO Chassis. To maintain a physical ADC block or cards in the Chassis, we moved the 5th card from slot 1-8 one slot to the right to 1-7, and then installed the new 6th card into the vacated slot 1-8. The interface cards are in numerical order.
The h1iopsusauxh56 model was updated to read the 6th ADC.
We installed Jeff's new h1susopo model into the CDS system, following my instructions on the wiki page https://cdswiki.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/wiki/AddingNewFrontEndModel
We were planning on adding the SQZ beckhoff PLC (h1ecatc1plc4) to the DAQ as well, but I discovered 60 channels in the INI file which are not in the running system. I will work with Daniel and Patrick next week to resolve this.
The DAQ was restarted to sync up to the new h1iopsusauxh56 and the new h1susopo model. The second trend file at the time of the restart was hidden away for NDS1 trending purposes.
As-Built IO Chassis drawing changes are forthcoming.
The image attached shows the 5 way cross installed. The Fiber feedthru (currently blanks) are visible below the cross. The five ISI cables are rerouted to FTs on the cross but the in-air cables have not been reconnected. I'll do that after Kyle gives it all a look and touch; fingers cross for leak checks down the road. The facing 25p has no cables but it was readily available, that is why it isn't a blank.
Here are a couple photos with the feedthru protection on and the cables secured. Please be very cautious with the CPS cables going out to the left. The ends of the cable are barely behind the shroud plane and I certainly worry about them.
I've added a button the ISI_CONFIG screen that transitions the seismic systems to a robust state to protect the suspensions during a verly large earhquake, like the infamous Montana earthquake or the recent Mexican earthquakes. It's the red button that says Very Large Earthquakes. This script requests the DAMPED state for all of the chambers with ISIs and switches the gains of the all the L4Cs and GS13s. This button is likely temporary, but is probably the state we want to leave the seismic systems in when no-one is on site in the future. The script lives at /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/scripts, and is called SET_EQ.py .
As I recall, being the operator on site for the Montana quake, one or two optics/chambers tripped, and I couldn't see any info on a website or even on the plot of our own siesmometers about an EQ, so at first I didn't know that there was an EQ, I thought it could have been some other kind of a failure, and I only knew it was an EQ when more things tripped.
I'm wondering if, given that scenario, you would recommend that in the next observing run Operators transition SEI if any chamber trips, as a precausion for big close EQs?
Would there be enough time for SEIs to transition before a big close EQ arrives?
If not, is there any down side to having an EQ arrive mid-transition?
The motivation for this code comes from the struggles commissioners had during the Mexican earthquake on Sept 8th, this year. The goal is to put the ISIs into a state where it is as easy as possible to keep the ISI damping loops on. It's a last ditch effort to protect the suspensions. So, even if the earthquake is already tripping platforms, it would be best to make the transition, anyway.
For an earthquake as close as the Montana quake, we won't get any advanced notice. I still would not advocate just switching to this configuration just because some chamber tripped. It takes about 45 seconds for a BSC to go from Fully Isolated to damped and about 2 minutes the other way, and there will still be settings to recover after (because the script switches the gains on ISI seismometers). You will also probably have to run an initial alignment. Some thought should be given to a wall FOM for the live ground seismometer signals to help identify if there is an earthquake arriving on site, unannounced. The low frequency blrms on the wall only update every minute, and are probably too slow to help, but all 3 seismometers seeing large, similar signals at the same time is a pretty good indication.
On the 5th I opened the soft covers on HAM6 to lock the ISI and noticed that one of the black glass pieces was broken. I'm posting a couple of pictures here. Betsy, JeffK and others have looked to see if we noticed this during the last HAM6 vent, but none of the pictures in the alog show this glass in any detail.
Do you think you should write an incident report on this?
No, I don't think this warrants an incident report, since I believe this is a laser burn which broke the glass, not some other "accident". It does warrant an FRS however, since we will likely need a better "fix" to this. Further details:
On Friday, Keita and I inspected this broken beam dump on the North side of the HAM6 table in chamber. I have more pictures attached below. When I carefully pushed the 2 pieces of broken glass back together (like a puzzle) on the mount, I could see a hole of missing glass (PIC 1 and 2 below). As well, there is a shard of black glass sitting on the table about 8 inches in front of the beam dump, maybe "launched" from the hole site of the glass piece (PIC 3, circled in BLUE). As well, there are 2 other burn marks on this same piece of black glass off to the left visible in the first pics.
Sheila is going to help me with another round of inspections here and help determine beam propogation. We will also look into timing with potential shutter/toaster fussiness, and HAM6 pressure changes to hone in on when this may have occured since April 2016 when it was deemed healthy.
While inspecting HAM6 last week, I also looked a bit at the "toaster" fast shutter. A quickish look it's wires did not reveal any burn spots. Pictures attached.
As well, there is another black glass beam dump in the NW side of the table, close to the viewport which shows what appears to be some burn markings (last Picture). Likely another FRS addition.
For further follow up on the broken beam dump -- identified as the OMC REFL Beam Diverter dump -- check out LHO aLOG 38998 and FRS Ticket 9196. Regarding the dump which has a "glancing blow" burn mark, that's the dump catching the OM3 TRANS beam. Indeed, the burn mark appears on the *outside* of the functional part of the dump. So, I don't think there's a need for action there (and hence no need for an FRS ticket).
J. Kissel, T. Sadecki Attached are the results of the H1 SUS ITMX fiber characterization perform last week while the QUAD was (in-air) still fully suspended. After initially gathering data on the +X / +Y, Front Right (as viewed looking at the HR surface, a.k.a. the Angus Convention) without using a speaker array (see LHO aLOG 38743), we resumed the next day using the array, but with it not attached to the structure in any way, just resting on the chamber floor near the Left or Right side as needed. To complete Borja's table from LHO aLOG 38309, Angus Global Prev. Avg. This Conv. Coord. In-Air In-Vac Result FL -X/+Y 502.2+/-0.25 502.68 499.656+/-0.015 FR +X/+Y 500.8+/-0.25 501.15 500.797+/-0.015 BL -X/-Y 501.2+/-0.25 501.35 500.922+/-0.015 BR +X/-Y 499.9+/-0.25 500.13 502.219+/-0.015 Naturally, the confusing directions in which these change from in-air in in-vac makes me wonder whether the naming convention didn't get mix up somewhere along the way... However, with these measurements, we've taken up to the 6th harmonic in air. There are a select few of these results which are highly questionable, if not down-right untrustworthy. They're marked with an asterisk. However, all results are determined by just finding the maxmimum frequency bin in the spectra. Having starred at all the data by eye, this works, but because the Q of the mode is so large in air, I inflate the uncertainty to include two bin-widths, assuming that the mode is perfectly bin-centered (which isn't true). In other words -- take this data with grains of salt and a few flecks of black pepper. Here're those results in tabular form: FL(-X/+Y) FR(+X/+Y) BL(-X/-Y) BR(+X/-Y) Fund. 499.656 500.797 500.922 502.219 2nd 991.859 993.5781 996 995.2969 3rd 1455.5 1461.906 1461.891 1471.969* 4th 1923.953 1924.766 1923.594 1931.125 5th 2384.375 2396.813 2382.125 2460.813* 6th 2837.75 2845.063 2846.625 2830.813 Excitingly, at least in broad strokes, 3 of the 4 fibers show very similar in-harmonicity (and that which doesn't has the black pepper data points). I'm not sure how, but it would be very interesting to compare these higher harmonic results against the in-vacuum higher harmonics. Do we have individual fiber identification for non-fundamental harmonics? It's not reported in the LHO Violin Mode Table, for instance.
Jeff - the transformation between "Angus Coordinates" and Global coordinates isn't correct here. The correct identifications are FR +X+Y FL +X-Y BR -X+Y BL -X-Y so the two fibres that look like they have been swapped between measurements were just misidentified. So, the previous In-Air identification is actually: Angus Global Prev. Avg. This Conv. Coord. In-Air In-Vac Result FL +X/-Y 502.2+/-0.25 FR +X/+Y 500.8+/-0.25 BL -X/-Y 501.2+/-0.25 BR -X/+Y 499.9+/-0.25 I'll let you re-identify your results as there is a 50% chance I'll switch them the wrong way.