Tue Oct 29 10:08:04 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 8min 0secs

Gerardo confirmed a good fill curbside.

Eric is running the fire pumps this morning for maintenance. This is a good opportunity to test CDS reporting and alarms. Attached MEDM shows CDS Overview with a red fire pumps button, it opens the FMCS overview (also shown). I let the first three cell phone alarm texts to proceed and then bypassed this alarm for the remainder of this morning.

Bypass will expire:
Tue Oct 29 08:41:08 PM PDT 2024
For channel(s):
    H0:FMC-CS_FIRE_PUMP_1
    H0:FMC-CS_FIRE_PUMP_2
 

FAMIS Link:  26015

Only CPS channels which look higher at high frequencies (see attached) would be the following (which have been like this on the order of weeks):

1. ITMx St1 V1
2. ITMy St1 V2
3. ETMy St1 H2

In 80171, we noted that the incorrect coil driver strength had been in use for getting the calibration in plotTMTS_dtttfs.m. We corrected this value and last week I was able to take transfer function measurements of the TMTs, which we wanted to take just so we could verify that the updated calibration was more accurate to the models, and also just because it had been four and two years since taking measurements for TMSX and TMSY, respectively.

I've attached the pdfs for their individual analyses (TMSX, TMSY), as well as comparisons between the most recent and previous measurements (TMSX, TMSY). The corrected coil driver strengths do shift the measurement traces up closer to the model traces.

TITLE: 10/29 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Corrective Maintenance
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 6mph Gusts, 4mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.25 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Maintenance day today

Workstations were updated and rebooted.  This was an OS packages update.  No conda packages were updated.

STATE of H1: Corrective Maintenance
SHIFT SUMMARY: PSL team made major progress and was able to get the second amplifier to output 140W! They will continue work tomorrow to wrap it up.
LOG:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

R. Short, J. Oberling

Continuing from the weekend.

First thing this morning Marc and Fernando turned off the 35.5MHz RF so we could swap the in-service EOM for the spare, as we had observed no beam distortions with the spare and having RF shouldn't change that.  We installed and aligned the spare and then moved on with recovering Amp1.  With the amp not being pumped we had 1.7W incident and 1.43W in transmission; after tweaking the alignment there was 1.55W in transmission (91.3% throughput, well above our 65% requirement).  We also preemptively turned the HWP on the High Power Attenuator (HPA) assembly after Amp1 to pass a minimum amount of power, so it was ready for Amp2 alignment checks.  We slowly increased the pump diode currents in 1A steps, keeping both diodes the same on the way up, and tweaked beam alignment into the amplifier at each step.  The power output by the amplifier was monitored with our roving 300W-capable water-cooled power meter.  The results:

To end we had power supply 1 @ 9.2A and power supply 2 @ 9.0A, to have most of our pump diodes monitors back at 100%; monitor for pump diode 3 (which is actually pump diode 1, the software is flipped; 3 and 4 are actually 1 and 2, with 1 and 2 actually being 3 and 4) is right below 90% while the rest are right below 100%, indicating pump diode 1 has seen the most degradation since install.  With these pumping currents we had 68.9W out of Amp1, so we aligned the beam onto the Amp1 power monitor PD and recalibrated it; we also recalibrated the NPRO power monitor PD as it turned out our original calibration was done with WP14 not fully optimized.  We then checked beam alignment up to Amp2, which all looked good.  We installed a temporary PBSC after M07 to check the polarization of the light incident on Amp2.  We turned the power in the Amp2 path up to ~3.55W (>5% of Amp1 output, to avoid the HPA causing any polarization weirdness).  PBSC transmission was measured at 0.47mW, and tweaking WP04 only got this down to 0.45mW, so polarization looked good.  We turned the power to ~1.71W in prep for Amp2 recovery, and measured the power transmitted through Amp2 with no pump light; this measured at 1.4W, a throughput of 81.9%.  At this point we broke for lunch.

After lunch we started recovering Amp2.  We didn't do any pre-alignment work, as our throughput was already higher than the 65% requirement so we started powering up Amp2 in the same way we did Amp1 (we stopped at 9.0A as that was where Amp2 was running before the NPRO swap).  The roving power meter was placed directly after L18, on the other side of the external shutter; we removed L18 on the off chance the laser power ablated any material from the power meter head.  We also pre-set the HPA after Amp2 to pass a minimum power in prep for alignment checks from Amp2 to the PMC.  Results of Amp2 recovery:

With Amp2 now mostly recovered (still had to increase the seed beam power, it was still at ~1.7W) we checked alignment between Amp2 and the PMC while we had low power in that path (L18 was reinstalled for this).  Everything here looked really good still.  We installed the cover onto the ISS AOM and the beam was nice and centered.  We then removed L18 again and reinstalled our roving power mete to increase the seed power into Amp2.  Ryan slowly increased the seed using the HPA after Amp1 while I watched all of the optical elements in the path with an IR viewer for any signs of early burn spots.  Everything went smoothly and at max Amp2 seed we have 141.3W out of Amp2.  We realigned the beam onto the Amp2 power monitor PD and recalibrated it in the Beckhoff software.  To finish for the day we closed the external shutter and turned on the power and PD watchdogs, as well as the NPRO noise eater.  The amplifiers are running overnight with the enclosure in Science Mode for more data gathering for glitches.  Tomorrow we will begin recovering the PSL stabilization systems.

Continuing on from Jenne's observation that there are still glitches in the new NPRO, I've tried to make a plot we can use to compare the glitch rate in the new and old NPROs, using the NPRO_PWR channel instead of the FSS channel which isn't available for the new NPRO. 

I've used a 3 hour stretch of observing time for the old NPRO, and a three hour stretch before the time when Jenne made a plot in 80837.  The ISS is not on for the new NPRO time, which is probably why the intensity is flcutuating and making it harder to see the small steps in power that are the glitches we are looking for.  In the second panel, I've plotted the data high passed with a 0.05 Hz butterworth, this helps to show the glitches, although not perfectly (in either case).  Based on this, the glitches look to be happening at a roughly similar rate, although somewhat less with the new NPRO.

This script in in sheila.dwyer/DutyCycle)4/dutycycleplots/PSL_glitches.py

Mon Oct 28 10:11:10 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 11min 6secs

Travis confirmed a good fill curbside. TC-B slightly off.

Working with Jason and with advice from Daniel, we powered down the 35.5MHz RF Amplifer in the CER at 10am PST.  We will power it back up when the EOM work is complete.

 F. Mera, J. Oberling, R. Short, M. Pirello

Last week a bulk of the mobilization and earthwork began on the new storage building nearest the Staging Building. Footings are dug, and layout has begun. Beginning this week, the DGR team will shift from a 4-10 schedule to 5-8's as they start to build forms. They expect a forklift to be delivered sometime this morning and rebar to follow shortly after. The construction is presently ahead of schedule and the hope at this time is to begin pouring concrete as early as the end of next week.

T. Guidry 

TITLE: 10/28 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Corrective Maintenance
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan S
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: USEISM
    Wind: 9mph Gusts, 5mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.52 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

• PSL Amp1 recovery continues today
• DGR contractor working land behind staging building
• Secondary microseism is partially above te 90th percentile

Camilla C, Brice W, TJ S

Following the procedure written out by Alastair - T1600050 - today we did a full flush of both chiller lines with ~13gal each.

The last time a full flush was done, and not just refills from line leaks or chiller swaps, was back in 2016 (alog30017). This is notably, much longer than the 6mo service interval the manufacturer recommends. Just like back then, after turning off the lasers, power supplies, and AA chassis, we disconnected all electrical and tried to drain the chillers to start. We struggled to get much out of the chiller via the drain pipe, but a trickle would come out of the process input if the ball valve on the back of the chiller is set to a 45deg angle. After the chillers were mostly drained, we tried to wipe the reservoirs to get out any junk that was in there. We then set up a hose with a quick connect and connected it to the process input line and ran it to a bucket below the mezzanine to avoid carrying large quantities of water down those stairs (see attachment 1). The process output was hooked up to the chiller, then with two people on the mezzanine and one below to watch the bucket and hose, we turned on a chiller and filled the reservoir as the level dropped. We put about 13 gal through the system for each before turning off the chiller, which should be more than each system contains (alog30638).

Seperately, I noticed while we were swapping the TCSY laser that some of the 1/4" tubing connected to the RF driver felt softer than others also connected to it. Turns out, 2 of the 8 connected to it are a different type - Tygon 2001 (softer) vs Tygon2475. According to a data sheet I found, the 2001 has a max working pressure of  30psi compared to the 2475 max at 50psi. We should really think about replaing all of these lines post O4, but I'll need to look into how much pressue these lines actually have.

Sheila, Daniel, Vicky

On Tuesday, Sheila and I took some beam profiles of the squeezer pump beam after the pump AOM used for ISS (GAOM1). This is trying to understand and fix the squeezer pump ISS issues that result from GAOM1 becoming misaligned on SQZT0.

Summary and proposed plan: the vertical beam profile we measured looks reasonable, the horizontal profile looks off (potentially related to measuring after the AOM). We could move GAOM1 closer to SHG by 1-2 holes to get closer to the beam waist of ~100um that is about 1.3m after SHG. While GAOM1 is out, we could re-measure the horizontal beam profile to make sure it is OK.

Here are plots of the pitch beam profiles we took before, and the very quick a la mode plot code that adapts Sheila's and Georgia's previous codes. I think the vertical beam profiles we took line up with Georgia's previous measurements and D1201210, which both say there should be a waist like 1.25m - 1.3m after SHG. In real life, we measured from z=0 at the EOM mount edge closest to GAOM1, to the face of the beam profiler (may need to take into account beam profile distance..).

So it seems possible that GAOM1 is like 0.02-0.05 meters (~2 inches?) downstream of the waist. From photos and SQZT0 layout D1201210, there is room to try moving GAOM1 closer to L15 (closer to SHG) by 1-2 holes.

• At LLO (example photo), GAOM1 misalignments are not a pump ISS problem - and their GAOM1 is also several holes closer to L15 than LHO's  (which is what these profiles suggest to try).
• Kinda ignoring the horizontal beam profiles here since we measured after GAOM1, and the beam's yaw profile was not fitting well while measuring. The pump beam after GAOM1 looked kinda double-lobed with some smaller outer fringes even with the AOM drive at 0V, where it should be "passing everything" and not diffracting, but maybe there was some RF leakage.. The profiler's fitting function was fitting both lobes at once and being thrown off by the fringers, so likely over-estimating the waist in yaw (blue). Worth checking the beam profile without the AOM in place.

Useful DCC references:

• SQZT0 layout D1201210 and mode-matching document here: see pg.4, should be a waist of w0~100um at z~1.3m from SHG.
• SQZT0 Green AOMs for PUMP + FCGS paths: E2000561. GAOM1 for pump ISS is M1250-P200L-0.75, a 200 MHz AOM with aperture of 0.75 mm. Updated +200MHz label on SQZT0 medm screen. GAOM1 has a visibly smaller hole than the other AOMs.

Vicky, Sheila

Summary:  Today we learned that frequency independent anti-squeezing is a very good way to determine which sign the homodyne angle is. 

Background: I've been working on using code from Vicky's repo and the noise budget repo to do some checks of a quantum noise model, this is in a new repo here. 

Details about how this model is made:

The first attached plot illustrates how these models and plots are made.  It starts with a no squeezing time, and an esitmate of non quantum noises from the noise budget, (dark gray, this one is from Elenna's recent run of the noise budget: 80603  ) and an estimate of the arm circulating power along with other parameters set in a quantum parameters file in the same format that is used by the noise budget.  It fits the readout losses by adding a gwinc model of quantum noise with the noise budget estimate of other noises, and adjusting the readout losses of the gwinc model, this is done from 1.5-1.8kHz in this case.

Based on this readoutlosses we get a model of quantum noise without squeezing, and subtract that from the no squeezing trace to get an estimate of the non-quantum noise.  This is enough different from the noise budget one that I've used that as the estimate of the non-quantum noise for the rest of the traces. 

By subtracting this subtraction estimate of the non-quantum noise, it estimates squeezing in dB, and finds a median level of dB from 1.5-1.8kHz for anti-squeezing and squeezing. This should be the same with and without the filter cavity, but in this data set there is slightly more anti-squeezing in the time without the filter cavity, so I've used FIS and FIAS to estimate the nonlinear gain and total efficiency for squeezing.  The nonlinear gain is translated into generated squeezing for gwinc, and the injection losses for squeezing are set so that the injection efficiency* readout efficiency = total squeezing efficieny. 

With this information we can generate models for anti-squeezing and squeezing traces, but fitting the squeezing angle to minimize or maximize quantum noise.  Then for the mid angle traces, the squeezing angle is fit to minimize the residual between the data and the quadrature sum of the subtraction estimate of non quantum noise and the model. We can then look at these plots and try manually changing parameter in the quantum parameter file.

Homodyne angle:

We've been stumped for a while about the excess noise we see with low frequency anti-squeezing, in 79775  I went through old alogs and see that we've had this mismatch of model with our data for a long time.  Today we tried flipping the sign of the homodyne angle and see that low frequency anti-squeezing is much closer to fit both with and without the filter cavity. Compare the 2nd and 3rd attachments to see this.

We still have more work to do on this model, including adding in the additional traces near squeezing and near anti-squeezing that Camilla took, and checking if it can give us any information about arm power (it doesn't seem very useful for that), or the mode mismatches. 

J. Kissel
WP 12140

I've completed 6 SUS + 4 ISI = 10 of 12 total DOF excitations that I wanted to drive before I ran out of time this morning. Each drive was "successful" in that I was able to get plenty of coherence between the 4 DOFs of ISI drive and SUS response, and some coherence between 6 SUS drive DOFs and ISI response. As expected, the bulk of the time was spent tuning the ISI excitations. I might have time to "finish" the data set and get the last two missing DOFs, but I was at least able to get both directions of LPY to LPY transfer functions, which are definitely juicy enough to get the analysis team started.

Measurement environmental/configuration differences of the HAM2 ISI from how they are nominally in observing:
    - PR3 M1 DAMP local damping loop gains are at -0.2, where they are nominally at -1.0. (The point of the test.)
    - CPS DIFF is OFF. (needed to do so for maintenance day)
    - Coil Driver z:p = 1:10 Hz analog low-pass (and digital compensation for it) is OFF. (need to do so to get good SNR on SUS M1 drive without saturating the SUS DACs)

Interesting things to call out that are the same as observing:
    - The PR3 alignment sliders were ON. P = -122 [urad]; Y = 100 [urad]. (Don't *expect* dynamics to change with ON vs. OFF, but we have seen diagonal response change if close an EQ stop. Haven't ever looked, but I wouldn't be surprised of off-diagonal responses change. Also DAC range gets consumed by DC alignment request, which is important for driving transfer functions.)
    - Corner station sensor correction, informed by the Bier Garten "ITMY" T240 on the ground. (the h1oaf0 computer got booted this morning, so we had to re-request the SEI_CS configuration guardian to be in WINDY. The SEI_ENV guardian had been set to LIGHT_MAINTENANCE.)
    - PR3 is NOT under any type of ISC global control; neither L, P, or Y. (global ISC feedback for the PRC's LPY DOFs goes to PRM and PR2.)

There are too many interesting transfer functions to attach, or even to export in the limited amount of time I have. 
So -- I leave it to the LSC team that inspired this test to look at the data, and use as needed.

The data have been committed to the SVN here:
    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Data/
        2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_T_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_V_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_R_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_P_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml

    /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/Common/Data
        2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_L_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_T_0p02to50Hz.xml
            [ran out of time for V]
            [ran out of time for R]
        2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_P_0p02to50Hz.xml
        2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml


For the SUS drives templates, I gathered:
     Typical:
     - The top mass, M1, OSEM sensors, in the LTVRPY Euler Basis, calibrated into microns or microradians, [um] or [urad].
         H1:SUS-PR3_M1_DAMP_?_IN1_DQ             [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz]
     - The top mass, M1, OSEM sensors, in the T1T2T3LFRTSDD OSEM Sensor/Coil Basis, calibrated into microns, [um].
         H1:SUS-PR3_M1_OSEMINF_??_OUT_DQ         [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz]
     - The top mass, M1, OSEM coils' requested drive, in the T1T2T3LFRTSD OSEM Sensor/Coil Basis, in raw (18 bit) DAC counts, [ct_M1SUS18bitDAC].
         H1:SUS-PR3_M1_MASTER_OUT_??_DQ          [Filtered with the 32x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 512 Hz]

     For this set of templates:
     - The bottom mass i.e. optic, M3, OSEM sensors, in the LPY Euler Basis, calibrated into microns or microradians, [um] or [urad].
         H1:SUS-PR3_M3_WIT_?_DQ                  [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz]
     - The bottom mass i.e. optic, M3, optical lever, in PIT YAW Euler Basis, calibrated into mircoradians, [urad].
         H1:SUS-PR3_M3_OPLEV_???_OUT_DQ          [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz]
     - The ISI's Stage 1 GS13 inertial sensors, projected to the PR3 suspension point LTVRPY Euler basis, calibrated into nanometers or nanoradians, [nm] or [nrad]
         H1:ISI-HAM2_SUSPOINT_PR3_EUL_?_DQ       [Filtered with the 4x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 1024 Hz]
     - The ISI's Stage 1 super sensors, in the ISI's Cartesian XYZRXRYRZ basis, calibrated into nanometers or nanoradians, [nm] or [nrad]
         H1:ISI-HAM2_ISO_*_IN1_DQ                [Filtered with the 2x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 2048 Hz]

Note: The six M1 OSEM sensors in the Euler Basis are set to be the "A" channels, such that you can reconstruct the transfer function between the M1 Euler Basis to all the other response channels in the physical units stated above. As usual the excitation channel for the given drive DOF (in each template, that's H1:SUS-MC3_M1_TEST_?_EXC) is automatically stored, but these channels are in goofy "Euler Basis (18-bit) DAC counts," so tough to turn into physical units.

For the brand new ISI drive templates, I gathered:
     - The ISI's Stage 1 super sensors, in the ISI's Cartesian XYZRXRYRZ basis, calibrated into nanometers or nanoradians, [nm] or [nrad]
         H1:ISI-HAM2_ISO_*_IN1_DQ                [Filtered with the 2x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 2048 Hz]
     - The ISI's Stage 1 GS13 inertial sensors, projected to the PR3 suspension point LTVRPY Euler basis, calibrated into nanometers or nanoradians, [nm] or [nrad]
         H1:ISI-HAM2_SUSPOINT_PR3_EUL_?_DQ       [Filtered with the 4x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 1024 Hz]

     - The top mass, M1, OSEM sensors, in the LTVRPY Euler Basis, calibrated into microns or microradians, [um] or [urad].
         H1:SUS-PR3_M1_DAMP_?_IN1_DQ             [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz]
     - The bottom mass i.e. optic, M3, OSEM sensors, in the LPY Euler Basis, calibrated into microns or microradians, [um] or [urad].
         H1:SUS-PR3_M3_WIT_?_DQ                  [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz]
     - The bottom mass i.e. optic, M3, optical lever, in PIT YAW Euler Basis, calibrated into mircoradians, [urad].
         H1:SUS-PR3_M3_OPLEV_???_OUT_DQ          [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz]
     - The ISI's Stage 1 actuators' requested drive, in the H1H2H3V1V2V3 ISI actuator basis, in raw (16-bit) DAC counts, [ct_ISIST116bitDAC].
         H1:ISI-HAM2_OUTF_??_OUT                 [Didn't realize in time that there are DQ channels H1:ISI-HAM2_MASTER_??_DRIVE_DQ stored at fs = 2048 Hz, or I would have used those.]

Note: Here, I set the number of "A" channels to twelve, such that both the ISI's Cartesian basis and the PR3 Suspoint basis versions of the GS13s can be used as the transfer function reference channel.