TITLE: 07/01 Owl Shift: 07:00-15:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 69Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Jeff
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    Wind: 5mph Gusts, 4mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.06 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Up to 69Mpc after an earthquake. calm environment.

Shift Summary: Lock loss at start of shift due to a couple of earthquakes near Ecuador. Relocking took many tries. Did not need to do much tweaking (just a couple of quick BS Pitch adjustments) to relock. Ground motion was, perhaps, still a little excited.

The IFO has been locked in Observing for the past 5.5 hours. Environmental conditions are benign and range has been at or near 70Mpc. All well. 

   Locked and Observing after seismic activity settled down following the Ecuador earthquake. Environmental conditions are good. The range is around 70.0Mpc. All appears normal at this time.  

EDITS:

We slightly modify the way how we normalize the sensing matrix, but the conclusions remain the same. 

Previously, for a given dof (i.e., SRM or BS), we normalize its response in the sensors by [ Norm(phi_ASA) = sqrt(A_I**2 + A_Q**2 + B_I**2 + B_Q**2)(phi_ASA) ], where A/B for gouy phase and I/Q for demod phase, and the normalization factor is thus a function of sensor A's gouy phase at the AS port. 

Now we instead take the max of Norm over all the ASA gouy phase space, which slightly increase the conditional number. 

For completeness we also computed the conditional number for AS36 as a comparison. Here because the SRM shows up in the I phase (degenerate with spot centering signal), we relax the requirement of using only Q-phase signals which we place on the AS72 case. Yet we don't want to invert a overdetermined 4x2 matrix. Therefore we choose one of (AS36A_I, AS36B_I) to max SRM response and choose one of (AS36A_Q, AS36B_Q) to max BS response. Even under this relaxed condition, AS36 still has much larger (i.e. worse) conditional number than AS72 when 02/20 modes are present.  

=========================================================================================

We studied the AS72.8 ASC scheme (beating RF 45.5MHz and RF 118.3MHz sidebands at the AS port) for the new monolithic SRMs. In the simulation we adopt RoC_srm = -5.675m and T_srm = 32.35%. The results are attached.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1. If the differential ITM thermal  is small (1/f < 1/300km), the new scheme is robust against small variations of SRC one-way gouy phase. 

2. If the SRC one-way gouy phase is at the nominal value of 17.5 deg (0.5 deg smaller than the original one due to the change of SRM RoC; other SRC parameters fixed), the 02/20 modes of RF +118.3MHz is close to resonance and thus differential thermal lens changes the error signal noticeably. In the worst-case scenario the sensing matrix has a conditional number of 11 18. I.e., the sensing matrix is as degenerate as [1, 1; 0.7, 1] [1, 1; 0.8, 1]. As a comparison, with same amount of diff lens and relax the requirement of decoupling WFSs from QPDs, the AS36 sensing matrix has a conditional number of 36.

3. If we can tune the SRC one-way gouy phase (e.g. with a ring heater to tune SR3 RoC), then increasing the SRC one-way gouy phase will make the ASC signal more robust. For SRC one-way gouy phase of 22 deg, the largest conditional number is no more than 2 3 which can be easily inverted. 

DETAILS:

1. Most of our parameters are based on the Finesse input file (T1300904) for H1. We changed SRM parameters as described above; we also added differential ITM thermal lens of 1/f <= 1/100 km at both ITMX and ITMY, and allowed the SRC gouy phase to vary to account for its uncertainty as well as actions may happen (e.g. adding SR3 ring heater or moving SR2-SR3 distance) after O2. The modulation depth of the RF 118.3MHz sideband is assumed to be 1/1000 of the mod depth of RF 9.1MHz (37042), so the overall optical gain of AS73 is roughly 1/100 relative to AS36 (10 times higher transmissivity x 1000 times lower mod depth). 

2. All the error signals are plotted as functions of AS A sensor's gouy phase to account for our lack of knowledge of it absolute location. AS B is assumed to be 90 degree gouy phase apart from A. 

3. We phase the AS72.8 signal s.t. all the SUM goes into the I-phase (in the plots, resp phase of 0 or +-180). The spot centering motion will show up in the phase.

4. To decouple the wave-front distortion from the centering loops, we form the sensing matrix for SRM/BS using ASA-Q and ASB-Q. 

5. To quantify how degenerate the 2x2 sensing matrix is, we utilize the normalized conditional number. I.e., we first normalize each dof's total response (quadratic sum of I/Q phases and A/B sensors) to 1, and then do a singular value decomposition of the 2x2 sensing matrix with ASA-Q and ASB-Q. The normalized conditional number is then the ratio between the largest and the smallest singular values, and the larger this conditional number, the more degenerate a matrix is. E.g., [1, 0; 0, 1] has conditional number of 1, whereas [1, 1; 1, 1] has conditional number of infinity. The matrix [1, 1; 0.3, 1] has conditional number of ~4. 

TITLE: 06/30 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 54Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Jeff
LOG: all times UTC

• 20:27 - H1 in Observe
• 21:31 - H1 out of Observe - no change to IFO - triggered by guardian reload
• 21:32 - H1 in Observe
• 22:55 - H1 out of Observe - no change to IFO - stray click put ISC_LOCK to LOCKLOSS
• 22:57 - H1 in Observe
• 23:05 - lockloss, additional EQs arriving
• ISI still in Earth_Quake_2

• 22:34:07UTC - Verbal Alarm
• 22:35UTC - started the switch to Earth_Quake_2
• 22:37:20UTC - transition complete, GEOfon and EMSC reporting the EQ
• 22:42UTC - P-wave arrives Terramon and USGS not yet reporting
• 22:50 - USGS reported
• as of 22:51UTC - H1 is still locked, range droped to about 40Mpc and is currently back at 63Mpc
• 22:54UTC - Terramon reported
• 0.03-0.1Hz spiked to about 0.6um/s
• 0.1-0.3Hz spiked to about 0.4um/s

There was a time when "others" had asked that this get logged.  If this requirement is now outdated, please let me know.

Checking in to report that CP3 and CP4 have been stable since the sensing line blockage removal. CP3's fill signal is noisier since recent Dewar fill. Its cycle time was set to 1,000 seconds, where as the others are 10,000 s, so I changed CP3 to match the others. I also lowered its LLCV 'output lower limit' from 15% to 13% open because it bottomed out during the Dewar fill at 15% open.

• change in urad over 700 days
• start of O1 to June 2017
• all starting values adjusted so that start = 0

• change in urad over 700 days
• start of O1 to June 2017
• all starting values adjusted so that start = 0

FAMIS 4734

The script to plot the optical lever trends is returning an error:

patrick.thomas@zotws1:/opt/rtcds/userapps/release/sys/h1/scripts$ python oplev_trends.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "oplev_trends.py", line 29, in 
    buffers= conn.fetch(start,stop,channels_pit)
RuntimeError: Requested data were not found.

Today I spent some time on the LSC, because SRCL has been one of the dominant noises in DARM from 20Hz-60Hz for a while.

1) Retuning POP45 demod phase.  I changed the POP45 demod phase from 86.5 to 67.1, to minimize the SRM signal in POP 45Q. I also checked that the current phasing of POP9 does a good job of minimizing the PRM signal in POP9Q. I did this following the procedure Evan Hall describes in 24933.

• As I rotated the phase, the MICH loop shape changed, as well as the couplings from MICH to PRCL and SRCL.  (1st screenshot).  SRCL and PRCL didn't change, but the scross couplings from MICH to those loops did change, which is also shown in the screenshot.
• The second screenshot shows that all 3 DRMI control signals had small reductions in the control signals after changing the demod phase.

2) Retuning PRCL-SRCL subtration in input matrix.  I found that the input matrix element subtracting POP9I from POP45I for SRCL wasn't doing its job of making SRCL insensitive to PRCL very well.  By changing the element from -0.024 to -0.03195 I saw a 15dB reduction in the coupling from a PRM drive to the SRCL error signal, but this didn't reduce our control signals much. The third attached screenshot shows the impact on the coherence between DARM and DRMI signals of the demod phase change and the input matrix tuning. MICH and SRCL are both improved a bit.

Other things we did today:

• took measurements for reutning SRCL FF which I will use to calculate filters tomorrow. 
• Measurements for LSC sensing matrix
• Tried old settings for MICH->PR2, which made the interferometer unstable.  We might want to retune this to reduce the PRCL control signal. (25656)
• Tried not reducing the modulation depth for RF9, which also caused something to go unstable. Next time we try this we might want to go through noise tunings step by step to see what the problem is. 
• We have observed that since the vent the wind seems to have a negative impact on our range.  We have mostly been in commissioning mode during the windiest times, but if we are in observing and it is windy we might want detchar to take a look.