TITLE: 02/25 Owl Shift: 08:00-16:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 72Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Cheryl
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
Wind: 5mph Gusts, 4mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.21 μm/s
useism has inched up slightly from a low state over the last 12hrs (there is a storm due in Sunday-ish)
QUICK SUMMARY:
Received a 6+hr locked H1 & seismically quiet earth. Just went through the Shift Checksheet. Here's to a nice weekend of data-taking.
TITLE: 02/25 Owl Shift: 08:00-16:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 72Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY:
[Vaishali, Kiwamu, Sheila(remotely)]
WP 6497
Sheila suggested us doing an interesting test today during the commissioning time window. The measurement we did is a coherence measurement between the bullseye sensor and DARM while changing the PR3 spot position.
The result suggests that a part of the broadband lump in 200 Hz-1 kHz is due to beam size jitter with a caveat that we couldn't fully reproduce the broadband lump.
[Background]
Back in pre-O2 commissioning, we had unidentified broadband noise in 200 Hz - 1 kHz (e.g. alog 30752) which was found to be a function of the PR3 spot position. One hypothesis was beam size jitter somehow coupling to OMC DCPDs.
[The measurements and results]
We tested three different PR3 spot positions, all of which is characterized by POP_A QPD readouts as follows.
Our intention was to reproduce what Sheila observed in this past November (31628) with a hope to reproduce the broadband lump. However, we didn't get drastic increase in the frequency band -- we only obtained a 18% increase at around 400 Hz. See the second attachment for the increased DARM noise. Despite different alignment, configurations (B) and (C) gave almost identical DARM noise. Increased noise below 30 Hz is presumably due to mistuned A2L couplings, as we have moved the spot position.
The first attached figure shows the coherence between the bullseye sensor (sorry for any confusion, but PIT = beam size jitter, YAW = horizontal pointing jitter). The dashed lines are the ones from configuration (A). Notice that they are almost at the same level as the previous measurement (31628). The solid lines are the ones from configuration (B). Those from configuration (C) are not shown as they are almost identical to configuration (B). As we have moved the PR3 spot position, the coupling of beam size jitter increased while the horizontal jitter coupling reduced. The coherence for beam size jitter became 0.05-ish above 300 Hz corresponding to a fractional contribution of 22 % to the DARM amplitude spectral density. Also, at the same time, the power recycling gain improved which is consistent with what Sheila observed.
These results indicate that broadband noise is more or less reproducible, and also, a part of broadband noise is due to beam size jitter.
Later, we tried further exploring the parameter space of the PR3 spot position to see if we can further elevate noise in 200 Hz - 1 kHz. This lead to a lockloss presumably due to too much misalignment on PRM when we were at (POP_A_PIT, POP_A_YAW) = (-0.3, +0.6). We couldn't find a location where the broadband lump becomes more prominent.
[A minor change in bullseye signals]
Besides, we made minor modifications on the bullseye settings.
Another caveat:
Later, Keita pointed out that we shouldn't have put a low pass in the sum channel because it spoils the dynamic cancelation of intensity noise. However, if this theory holds, the implementation of the low pass shouldn't decrease the coherence between PIT and SUM as it allows for intensity noise to contaminate both channels in a same way. But we saw a significant decrease in the coherence by a factor of 100 or so. We will get back to this point in the next week and assess what is going on.
With single precision floating point representation and two poles at 30 mHz anything above ~30 Hz is probably bit noise.
A follow up on the beam size jitter measurement.
So far the data seems still consistent with the hypothesis that excess noise in 200 - 1000 Hz is due to beam size jitter which happens to be coherent with intensity noise at the output of the high power oscillator (HPO).
The first attachment is a screenshot of plots showing the coherence of DARM with some relevant intensity noise channels. The data is from configuration (C), see the above entry for details. The below is a list of remarks on the plots.
prior to the reordering, old ITM data files were under the path
/data/ITM/h1hwsmsr/ITM[X,Y]/GPS_START_TIME
where GPS_START_TIME is of the format NNNNN00000 (each directory spans 100,000 seconds, about 27 hours).
Each ITM[X,Y] directory contains about 0.6TB of data.
These old GPS directories were moved into the new locations where current data is being written:
/data/H1/ITMX_HWS/
/data/H1/ITMY_HWS/
Note that there are still two old data directories under /data/ITM/ITM[X,Y]/1142800000 but these directories also exist in the new area so I cannot do a simple directory rename.
/data holds 1.7TB of data, of which 0.6TB is old ITMX, 0.5TB is old ITMY, 0.6TB is new data. The new data is split over the four cameras: ITMX=209GB, ITMY=50GB, ETMX=200GB and ETMY=200GB
TITLE: 02/24 Day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Commissioning
INCOMING OPERATOR: Cheryl
SHIFT SUMMARY: We have been in a commissioning mode since 17:27 UTC. Since then we have had to wait out a 6.9M EQ from Fiji, and many people took advantage of the down time to get work done. We are locked again and do more coherence tests while waiting for the OK from LLO.
LOG:
Heather, Keita, Sheila
We noticed that whenever H1 regains lock status, the OAF BLRMS range contributions channel 5 takes several hours to stabilize (see first plot). We attributed this behaviour to the fact that the BLRMS filter, whose frequency range corresponds approximately to the violin modes, was not wide enough, leading to leakage. We broadened the frequency range and loaded it while H1 was in commissioning mode, and a plot of the adjusted filter is attached. No changes were made to SDF.
In addition, we noticed a few frequency labels in SUS_CUST_VIOLIN_OVERVIEW.adl (in particular, ITMX mode 1 and ETMX mode 4) did not match the actual frequency values being filtered, so we edited MEDM to fix the discrepancies. ITMX mode 2's filter name was also incorrectly labelled, and this has been fixed. These changes were cosmetic and do not affect the violin mode filters themselves.
Kyle noted y-arm pressure rise last night. This morning I found the controller for Y2-8 ion pump faulted with error 02. Rebooted and came back at 350 V. Plugged pump into second channel and read 700 V at 0.5 A.
Marc and Richard tested the HV cable and concluded the cable connector on pump side is faulty. Marc will comment with his results.
End Y
Y2-8
End Y
Conclusion
It looks as if the ion pump end of the cable is shorted in or near the connector at Y2-8. The cable near the end of the connector does not have strain relief and is slightly deformed. Manipulating the cable near the connector did not change the cable VSWR trace, but it did change the measured ohms slightly. More can be learned from disassembly of the connector housing without damaging the connector. This should be investigated and the connector repaired / replaced next maintenance window.
Starting CP3 fill. LLCV enabled. LLCV set to manual control. LLCV set to 50% open. Fill completed in 40 seconds. TC B did not register fill. LLCV set back to 16.0% open. Starting CP4 fill. LLCV enabled. LLCV set to manual control. LLCV set to 70% open. Fill completed in 100 seconds. TC A did not register fill. LLCV set back to 37.0% open.
model restarts logged for Thu 23/Feb/2017 - Wed 22/Feb/2017 No restarts reported
model restarts logged for Tue 21/Feb/2017
2017_02_21 12:15 h1broadcast0
2017_02_21 12:15 h1dc0
2017_02_21 12:15 h1fw0
2017_02_21 12:15 h1fw1
2017_02_21 12:15 h1fw2
2017_02_21 12:15 h1nds0
2017_02_21 12:15 h1nds1
2017_02_21 12:15 h1tw1
maintenance day, DAQ restart to reintroduce HWS slow channels.
In response to alog34290, I updated the script that creates the channel list and the actual channel list in the autoBurt.req
Heather, Vaishali, Evan, Kiwamu, Jeff B.
DQ shifter: Beverly
During her DQ shift, Beverly noticed excess noise in the SUS bounce/roll modes beginning at Feb 22 13:00 UTC onward, and asked if it might be correlated to the ground motion (see Beverly's Wed Feb 22 DQ shift summary and attached Feb 22 plots). There was indeed a large gust of wind that hit LHO at around 13:00 UTC, as well as a degradation in alignment in the YAW degree of freedom, where the YAW signal was about 0.7 above the reference line (this degradation would also add to low frequency noise). The reason for the excess noise was suspected to be a combination of both, so Jeff made adjustments to the A2L, after which we see that the amplitude of bounce/roll modes have dropped off at around Feb 23 01:00 UTC (or Feb 22 17:00 PST), which is when we ran the A2L (see attached Feb 23 plots).
Beverly's alog entry for her DQ shift can be found here: 34364
Checked the mass centering on the T240 Deployed Wednesday, but I did not center them.
Day U V W
Wednesday 0.12 0.09 0.02V
Friday -.11 -.22 -.32
So the warm up of the springs is evident on the mass positions but it is still within comfortable range.
It will need re-centering when we put the T240 into the BRS enclosure (Tuesday.)
Here is spectra for the T240 (current ADC_0_ traces) compared to the ISI gnd STS (insulated) and from the PEM STS inside the BRS enclosure (Reference ADC channels.) I'll attribute the difference at low frequency to the un-insulated state of the T240 and when inside the BRS (maybe it will get some extra insulation then) it will compare better at lower frequencies.
I'm a bit surprised they don't agree more at the microseism but there may be a scale factor mismatch between the two seismometers. It would be good to look at the coherence between the two.
But the T240 does look better at low frequencies and is more promising. One thing I thought was interesting was the difference at high frequencies between the on-floor seismometers and the BRS-platform seismometer. The BRS-platform has three swivel-feet with ~3 mm rubber shims under them, resulting in increased motion between 10-50 Hz and maybe reduced motion at higher frequencies. Perhaps the feet could be redesigned to reduce this motion.
Here is this morning's look at the PEM T240 located on the floor next to the BRS (opposite side of the BRS to the ISI_GND_STS.
The PEM ADC is a bit unknown to me so like before when I made the PEM STS equal to the ISI GND STS by using a gain proportional to the ratio of the ISI STS/PEM STS amplitude at the useism, I now multiplied that scale factor by 5/4 (the ratio of the STS/T240 sensitivity.) If you compare this ASD with that in aLog 34381, one might argue the traces are more similar at the useism. Edit--added Coherence.
Tomorrow, this T240 will be moved into the BRSY enclosure replacing the STS that has been giving me troubles for the past few weeks.
We were already in Commissioning but then a 6.9 from Fiji rolled through.
TITLE: 02/24 Day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 69Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
Wind: 3mph Gusts, 2mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.18 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: 2.5hours lock at 70Mpc. Hopefully the earthquakes dont continue today.
TITLE: 02/24 Owl Shift: 08:00-16:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 66Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: TJ
SHIFT SUMMARY:
Another nice quiet shift other than a decent-sized quake from the other side of the hill (off north Vancouver island).
LOG:
Monitoring from home. Likely won't need to be addressed tonight