1334 - 1357 hrs. local time 

This completes WP #7095

at around 18:00:17 UTC today both ALS lasers turned off, within seconds of each other.  Just now (around 20:10 UTC) I caused a lockloss.  Heading to end stations to restart.

Shifter: Beverly Berger

LHO Fellows: Jian Liu, Kentaro Mogushi, Phillipe Nguyen, Thomas Vo

• The duty cycle averaged 70% (Thu-72.3%, Fri-72.4%, Sat-68.7%, Sun-66.3%) with the BNS range typically 55 Mpc.
• A small number of unusual, strong glitches were seen Thursday and Saturday. Following suggestions from Andy and TJ, these were seen to line up with glitching in ASC-CSOFT pitch and yaw. The former channel has been off scale since 12 June and out of spec since 7 April 2017. 
• Thirsty ravens were noticed in the PEM EY MIC channel every day between about 02:00 and 04:00 UTC and in h(t) at 94 Hz if the instrument was in lock.
• A weak (magnitude 1.9) EQ near Benton City at 07:21:15 UTC produced scattering seen in h(t) 15 seconds later. The EQ was visible only in the 0.3-10 Hz seismic bands. The response of the IFO to this "natural experiment" (thanks, Andy) could prove to be very useful.
• The violin mode excitation varied greatly with time during this period.
• Excessive glitching occurred most of the time with strong glitches at about 20'Hz, 24 Hz, and 211 Hz visible in glitchgrams. This glitching became even more pronounced on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday at somewhere between 13:00 UTC and 16:00 UTC until the lock ended. The lower frequency loud glitches were picked up by hVeto in one among SUS-ETMY_L1_NOISEMON..., SUS-ITMY_L1_WIT..., or PEM-EX_MAG_SUSRACK which seem correlated with each other.
• A number of alogs (see, e.g., alog 37799, 37874, 37846 and associated comments) in response to an alog 37775 and associated comments on the change in quad optics' pitch drift during the 6 July Montana EQ have tested a number of hypotheses to explain (or explain away) this observation. So far, no completely consistent explanation of this change has been found although a number of hypotheses have been ruled out.

See the complete results at https://wiki.ligo.org/DetChar/DataQuality/DQShiftLHO20170727 for more details.

   A2L YAW is a bit elevated. No other issues to report at this time. Will run the A2L repair script during the commissioning break this afternoon. 
   

 - Vergo is scheduled to join the O2 run at 08:30 UTC on 08-01-2017. 
 - There will be commissioning noise investigations this afternoon from 13:00PT to 17:00PT 
 - Reviewed Work Permits for Tuesday maintenance 
   - Kyle asked to crane some equipment At Mid-X - Need to tag DetChar if done during Observing
 - Reviewed open FRS tickets
   - Future FRS reviews will be after the 09:30 morning meeting 

model restarts logged for Sun 30/Jul/2017 - Wed 26/Jul/2017 No restarts reported

model restarts logged for Tue 25/Jul/2017
2017_07_25 09:26 h1broadcast0

Maintenance day, added channels to DAQ GDS broadcaster for seg-gen

model restarts logged for Mon 24/Jul/2017 No restarts reported

Dave B., Jonathan H. & Jeff B. 

   Jonathan restarted the RemoteAccess IOC to clear the "Stale" message on the RACCESS section of the CDS Overview. Jeff refreshed the CDS Overview on the Video2 machine to pickup the new CDS Overview MEDM screen. 

Everything looks normal. Current increase to diodes is evident.

   Posted latest plot of BRS trends. BRS-X drift has been slowly upward, and is hovering around 10000. BRS-Y is drifting downward and is slightly below -10000.    

TITLE: 07/31 Owl Shift: 07:00-15:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 54Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Jeff
SHIFT SUMMARY: locked with steady range
LOG:

• 10:00UTC - TCSY chiller flow dropped
• 12:16UTC - TCSY chiller flow rate back to 3.2, dropped slightly again and recovered
• TCSY laser power remained steady throughout
• 13:31UTC - PeterK to Staging Builing for optics lab work

TITLE: 07/30 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 54Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Cheryl
SHIFT SUMMARY: H1 was locked at NLN and Sheila was running a measurement when I arrived. If I understand correctly we lost lock when Sheila attempted to transition from ETMY to ETMX. Lost lock while locking arms on green and upon relocking arms on green the Y arm transmission had dropped. Moved TMSY to recover it. Later lost lock between ROLL_MODE_DAMPING and DC_READOUT_TRANSITION when the ETMX SUS WD tripped. I think Sheila said it might have been due to violins, so upon relocking we stopped at ENGAGE_SOFT_LOOPS to damp them. Made it to NLN and set to observing. Damped PI modes 27 and 28.

LOG:
23:25 UTC Lock loss. Commissioning. Relocking.
Had to move TMSY to increase green transmission.
ETMX RMS WD tripped between ROLL_MODE_DAMPING and DC_READOUT_TRANSITION. Lock loss. Relocking.
00:16 UTC Stopping at ENGAGE_SOFT_LOOPS. Violin mode damping.
02:17 UTC Observing.

I used Conlog to find the violin mode damping filter settings at July 6 2017 06:00:00 UTC. According to the summary pages we were locked and in observing at that time. According to the USGS the 5.8 Montana earthquake occurred July 6 2017 06:30:17 UTC.

I have double checked the gains and degrees of freedom. It might be worth double checking the filters, as these were less straightforward to find.

ETMX
Filters, Gain, DOF
Mode 1: 505.587 +60deg 100dB, +5, P
Mode 2: 505.707 +60deg 100dB, 0, P
Mode 3: 505.707-505.710 100dB, +10, P
Mode 4: 505.805 +60deg 100dB, -89.9315, P
Mode 5: 506.922 100dB, +3, P
Mode 6: 507.159-507.194 +60deg 100dB 'N507.391,506.922', -100, P
Mode 7: 507.194New +60deg 100dB, +15, P
Mode 8: 507.391 100dB, +5, P
Mode 9: -60deg 100dB 1004.537, +1, P
Mode 10: BB1003.6-1003.9 -60deg 100dB, +3, P

ETMY
Filters, Gain, DOF
Mode 1: 100dB 1009.44-1009.49, +15, P
Mode 2: 508.010 100dB, -40, P
Mode 3: 508.146New 100dB, -20, P
Mode 4: 508.206New +60deg 100dB, -20, P
Mode 5: 508.220 +60deg 100dB, -40, P
Mode 6: 508.289N +60deg 100dB +12deg, +500, P
Mode 7: 508.585 +60deg 100dB, -60, P
Mode 8: 508.661 +60deg 100dB, -500, P
Mode 9: -60deg 100dB 1009.02, 0, P
Mode 10: 100dB +30deg5k 4735, 0, P

ITMX
Filters, Gain, DOF
Mode 1: 500.05 +60deg 100dB, +50, P
Mode 2: 500.212 100dB, +100, P
Mode 3: 501.091 -60deg 100dB, +100, P
Mode 4: 501.208 100dB, +10, P
Mode 5: 501.256 100dB, +100, P
Mode 6: 501.452 100dB, +100, P
Mode 7: 502.621 240dB, +50, P
Mode 8: 502.744 +60deg 240dB, +10, P
Mode 9: -60deg 100dB 992.43, -10, P
Mode 10: -60deg 100dB 994.277, -10, P

ITMY
Filters, Gain, DOF
Mode 1: 501.606 -60deg 100dB, +20, P
Mode 2: 501.680 -60deg 100dB, +200, P
Mode 3: 501.749 100dB, +200, P
Mode 4: 501.811 100dB N501.749, -100, P
Mode 5: 503.007 +60deg 100dB, +100, P
Mode 6: 503.12 -60deg 100dB, -20, P
Mode 7: 504.804 +60deg 100dB, +500, P
Mode 8: 504.875 -60deg 100dB, -50, P
Mode 9: -60deg 100dB 994.646, +10, P
Mode 10: -60deg 100dB 998.81, -10, P

Jeff B, Sheila, Jim W by phone

I came in to do some commissioning.  Jeff B was starting to work on violin 1st harmonics while I planned to some ESD measurements so we took the IFO out of observing.  Jeff B made a modest increase in the violin damping gain the moment before the IFO unlocked and both end station ISIs and HPI's tripped.

This seems to be a coincidence, not some sort of violin mode/pump controller conspiracy.  The attached plot shows EY pump pressure goes to not OK about one second before EX pump pressure goes to not OK, which was about one second before Jeff changed the gain for ETMX MODE10 (with a 10 second ramp). I am not sure if we can trust the timing of the pump controller channels relative to the front ends.

With advice from Jim W on the phone, and using instructions from 37359 we are bringing back the pump controllers.

On 2017-07-27, during the lock loss around 2 UTC, I noticed a sudden increase in kappa_tst from about 1.05 to 1.07. See the summary page for that day:
https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~detchar/summary/day/20170727/cal/time_varying_factors/

It is likely correlated with the end reaction mass being moved at that time:
https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=37800

LLO observed a similar issue, reported here:
https://alog.ligo-la.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=31108

Sheila, with many conversations with Keita, Jeff K, and others

We have several reasons to believe that something changed in our suspensions durring the Montana EQ.  (See alog from Beverly Berger and Josh Smith, (37775) which got us started looking at this, and Cheyl's log about the large triples, (37674).  We are still looking at some of the data from alignment sensors, but here arer some things we can say:

• The torque required to produce a fixed top mass pitch has changed after the EQ.
  • The 1st attachment shows the top mass applied force (calibrated in urad using sliders) vs osem readback for all 4 quads, color coded for before and after the EQ.  The linear relationship before the earthquake is offset from the relationship after the EQ. The torque applied to the top mass are calibrated into urad using the slider calibrations, I will update this alog in the morning with torques in torque units.
• The top mass pitch required to produce the same test mass alignment is 100s of uradian different before/after the EQ.
  • We trust the oplevs because restoring them after the EQ allowed us to lock the IFO with roughly the same spot positions as before the EQ.   (37451).  The second attachment shows you the change in top mass pitch required to produce a similar opLev pitch for each test mass.  
• We think that the osems (at least on the quad top masses) are OK.  
  • Jeff Kissel's top to top transfer functions which look the same as before the EQ. (37689)
  • The top mass actuation strength seems to be the same as before the EQ. In the first attachment the slope of the linear relationship before the EQ is the same as the slope after, meaning the actuation strenth is the same. 

There is more to be done checked on here, for example, checking if this has happened at any other times during the run (I checked one large EQ, I see no shifts like this), checking yaw (which has much smaller shifts than pitch), checking the triples, and looking at the alignments of the reaction chains.  Can we interpret the information we have to make a gues aout what might have changed in the suspension? Wire slipping or some kind of damage to the prisms are some things we have been thinking about.