TITLE: 08/23 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 50Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Jeff
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Nice quiet shift with H1 being locked for about 23hrs (current Triple Coincidence is over 9hrs).  Winds picked a little for 2nd half of shift and there was an EQ from Mexico that we rode through (as well as L1).
LOG:

• 15:44 Elec cart to Warehouse (Karen)
• 17:34 Tour leaving Control Room & going to X-arm Bridge (Greg M.)
• 18:10 An RV was seen leaving the LSB---Bubba informed me an RV made it through the gate (without my knowledge) earlier this morning and parked there...I'm assuming it turned around and went to the LSB parking lot.
• 18:13 CP1 bumped (Chandra, John)
• 18:41-19:43 Chandra running to EY
• 20:00-22:00 Squeezer spring work in Optics lab (Thomas, TJ)
• 22:17-23:17 GRB stand down alert confirmed & discussed between LLO & LHO.

T. Vo, T. Shaffer

First update: TST11356

Yesterday the blade tooling came from LLO (thank you Stuart!), so today I grabbed T. Vo to give me an extra set of hands for unpacking and pulling the blades. We had no issues and are now waiting for the wire before we pull that and suspend it. The only thing that we did slightly different from E1600174 was instead of folding up a wipe, we just placed a single layer under it. We found that it made it easier to see how much we were moving the screw without it bunching up underneath at the same time.

Random assortment of pictures from today attached.

Tag note: I realize that I can't decide where to put this, I think it will live in the LHO alog under H1:ISC,SUS from now on unless I here otherwise.

H1 locked for over 19hrs & Triple Coincidence of 6+hrs.  Had one tour & apparently an RV roll past the gate.

J. Kissel

Took regular charge measurements yesterday. Results for ETMY are beginning to wash out what effects we thought we might have seen after the July 6th 2017 EQ -- I'd argue that it's now a toss up in terms of each quadrant whether the effective bias voltage showed a significant step, or just apparently so given the gap in the data for ~6 weeks. ETMY's worst quadrants (ETMY UL in Pitch) are now at -93 [V], which is about 25% of the applied effective bias voltage (380 [V]). However, though angular the effective bias voltage has changed from -11 [V] to -92 [V] (a change of (93-11)/380 = 21%), the relative actuation strength in longitudinal -- as measured by calibration lines, reported on the summary pages -- has only changed by 10%. 

ETMX remains at a reasonably low level of effective bias voltage, where the worst quadrants (ETMX LL and LR) are showing effective bias voltages of ~40 [V], but the mean (average of all eight measurements, 4 quadrants in P and Y) is 20 [V]. This is mildly inconsistent with what Sheila has measured recently -- -5.2 [V] -- via longitudinal drive (see LHO aLOG 38233) However, I look forward to seeing the results of the test mass discharge system, slated to be used next Tuesday (2017-08-29).

All effective bias voltages reported by the angular actuation strength have an uncertainty at the level of 1-2 [V]

TITLE: 08/23 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 51Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ed
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    Wind: 4mph Gusts, 2mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Covering for Cheryl.  Ed handing off an H1 which has been locked for 15hrs (as seen from Verbal Alarm; Lock Clock was reset with wall computer reboots).  Currently going on 2.5hrs of Triple Coincidence.

TITLE: 08/23 Owl Shift: 07:00-15:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 51Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Cheryl (Corey subbing)
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Quiet shift
LOG:

H1 still locked and Observing at 50Mpc for ~ 12 hours. The lock clock was restarted when the nucs were rebooted earlier. No other issues noted.

Time listed in UTC:

09:59 Running script

10:14 Back to Observing

All times in UTC:

07:46 Nuc2 restarting

07:49Nuc3 restarting

07:56 Nuc6 restarting

07:57 Nuc5 restarting

08:05 Nuc4 doesn't seem to take the "Restart Command" going to try "Shutdown" and manually reboot.

• monitors wouldn't come on after reboot. I manually turned on the bottome display but the top is goin to require a ladder. It seems that the scripts ran but it's all onn the bottom display and the top is still on "standby" power.
• so, a little step-ladder and a little button push got the monitor on and pluging the KB/Mouse directly made arranging the screens easy.

08:16 Nuc1 restarting

• had to manually browse to the earthquake page of USGS.

08:32 Nuc0 restarting

• As i suspected. The instructions for handling this FOM need to be updated. The information to the template fo showing all three ranges isn't as it's stated in the wiki instructions. Running " /home/controls/HL-Range2.xml" no LLO on the graph.

TITLE: 08/23 Owl Shift: 07:00-15:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 49Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Jeff
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    Wind: 5mph Gusts, 3mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

   Relocked after maintenance and commissioning work finished, and back into triple coincident observing. No issues to report at this time.  

Rai W., Mike Z., Daniel S., Jeff K., Chandra R., Kyle R. 

Today the TMDS Gas Delivery Table was transported to the X-end VEA and set it up for operation.  The actual Surface Discharge Ionizer was mounted on a stand for today's demonstration purposes.  Nominally, it would be mounted to the dedicated TMDS port of BSC9's East Door.  The Vent/Purge air supply was ran and dry air supplied to the TMDS setup.  Prior to exposing the Ionizer to the conditioned air supply, the plumbing connection at the Ionizer was decoupled and connected to a test setup that facilitated the measurement of > 0.3 micron and > 0.5 micron particulate in the conditioned air. The air line was then re-coupled to the Ionizer.  An approximate 50/50 mix of Ethylene Glycol to Alcohol along with "chunks" of dry ice was used as a cold trap to the path.  

Rai W. gave an overview of the theory and a detailed tutorial as to the operation of the setup.  Daniel S. and Jeff K. noted details related to the ion production while Kyle R. and Chandra R. noted detail related to the vacuum related issues.  

The Ionizer setup performed satisfactorily (with caveats) at making comparable amounts of positive and negative ions.  

The plan now is to connect the Ionizer to BSC9 and perform an actual discharge of the ETMx during next Tuesday's maintenance day.  

My notes from today; 

1. Oscillations were noted and attributed to electronics design -> Daniel S. will address.  
2. Rai W. requested that we provide a means of support to take the weight of the Ionizer when mounted to the 1 1/2" valve on the BSC -> Kyle R. will address.  
3. Confirmation of the preferred means to pump to rough vacuum the X-end VE between cycles of discharge gas admission -> Chandra R. will address.  

The simple excuse might be that apparently not all the Isolation Gains were zero.

Okay, HEPI and ISI tripped from a HEPI Pump Station VFD OU3 fault.  Upon trying to recover, operator was unable to untrip the WD.  The T240 was riled up and touching the 32k limit and pressing the WD Reset button just tripped the platform again immediately with T240.  Additionally, JeffK noticed that the H1:ISI-ETMX_ST1_WD_MON_CURRENTTRIG was not RED(on T240) even when the T240 was still banging on the rail [indicating the T240 was being ignored although I can't say I know that based on model.]

Checking the model as a refresher, if all the ISO gains are zero, the ST1 ISO STATUS is zero and the T240 is ignored (text read, not my understanding of the model logic at this time although I believe it to be true from experience.)

So looking at ISO gains & WD signals, first plot, 10 minutes: You see the three attempts where the WD_MON_STATE goes to 1 and immediately tripping back to damp only (state3) and the first trigger remains 2 (T240.)  So even though the ISO GAINs are zero and the ISO STATUS remains zero, attempts to clear the WD trips it back blaming the T240s.

The fourth attempt to clear the watchdog state succeeds but shows a situation I do not understand.  You see all the ISO gains going to 0.1 with the ISO status switching to 1 and then back to zero when the gains go back to zero, as expected.  Did the Guardian do this?  The first step of the ISO gain ramp up is to 0.01, not 0.1; you can see this on the gains toward the end of the traces.

My second plot shows the 6 horizontal T240 signals (the verts never hit 32k) and I checked overlying the curves that no attempt to clear the WD was made when none of the signals were at 32k.  The last attempt to clear the WD was after all the T240s are off the rail and while the weird brief gain switch to 0.1 occurred, the WD state remained 1 and recovery succeeded.

So why did the gains step up to 0.1?  That may be an aside study.  And, why did the WD fail to clear while the T240s were hitting the rail even though the T240 should have been out of the 'loop?'

I'll keep looking.  Is it related to the HEPI tripping?  That was kinda why the T240 MON was developed.  In this case, HEPI was reset and had completed its isolation steps.  Was the WD circuit not getting the ignore the T240 signal?  Work ongoing, guess I should do an FRS.

I have compiled the results of in-air measurements during installation and in-vacuum measurements from the alogs; 14231 LLO (including corrections mentioned in alogs 21652 and 27901) and 17610 at LHO (including corrections mentioned on the comments).

In the case when a frequency split is shown on in-vacuum measurements we have taken the average of both frequencies. I have grouped these numbers per front and back fibres, then per test mass and then per detector, finally I obtained the difference as (in-vacuum – in-air) including the sign:

We notice that in most cases the frequency difference is always positive, so frequency increases when moving the suspension to in-vacuum.

The increase in frequency is always a few hundred mHz (mean of 0.3Hz and median of 0.4Hz), with a clear outlier on LLO_ITMY_FL (which as explained here seems to be involved with uncertainty in the identification).

There is not clear difference in frequency variation between front and back fibres (especially no sign difference) which would indicate pitch effect.

However, notice that as per the Technical document T1700399 the expected increase in frequency due to buoyancy is of 0.14Hz, and the variation in frequency due to pitch angles of 2mHz is of 0.33Hz (although that would be an opposite sign change between front and back fibres). Therefore while the observed changes cannot be explained through pitch and buoyancy alone, they are of the same order.