PI StripTool on nuc6 now has two StripTools. Upper StripTool (PI_monitoring.stp) handles modes with frequency under 17k Hz, lower (PI2_monitoring.stp) with frequency above 17kHz.
We've seen more modes than fit on a single StripTool and with the upcoming TCS changes, it's probably best to keep an eye on all possibilities. Both StripTools are found in /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isc/h1/scripts and can be opened from the PI Overview medm screen.
Reports:
- DBB shutter open results in a huge noise bump issue
- peaks are smaller, but still there wtih DBB closed off
- PMC high voltage noise: (HV drive coherent, better readout--> peaks visible, realignment of PMC improved peaks / but hump is still there)
- coupling mechanism from PMC length offset to DARM unclear
- PMC UGF was 600Hz instead of 5kHz. going to (nominal) 5kHz made DARM noise worse.
- Reducing PMC loop gain further is not helping enough
- projection ~x2 below noise bump.
- PMC wrong polsarization light? (would be almost resonant, and therefore sensitive to PMC length noise) not clear how the coupling downstream of PMC works.
- Jitter spectrum looks smooth - thermally diven? Is so, other modes also produced... 20 mode...!
- picomotor steering into PMC to test...
- SRM: alignment affects jitter bump... !?
======================================================================
To do:
- 9MHz missing in reflection (x5 missing: (2W-50W we are loosing 2.5x)) - > find 1W of 9MHz (what was the conclusion for REFL9 gain?)
- Low noise operaion at 12W, 24W (available in guardian)
- ER9 TCS configuration?
- PMC pole down
- Donut jitter verification? How?
Things to copy from LLO:
- Black glass for ETM camera to eliminate back-scatter
- ESD bias noise / zero crossing * run with ESD offset /reduced bias
- Compensation plate alignment ?
- PCAL switch (too much noise?)
"classical" tunings to be redone at operating point:
- A2L / ASC tuning
-Aux loops feed-forward
=======================================================================
Timeline:
- HPO: Earliest: Monday 10/24
- Option: 12W low power test first
- ER10 start LLO Oct 31 / LHO 10 days later
========================================================================
Evan G., Chris B. After Chris fixed the GPS time issue (LHO aLOG 30669), we were able to make a successful injection test, although not in low noise mode for a complete test of injection recovery. Note, however, that the output of the TRANSIENT filter was turned off, so the ODC state information is likely incorrect.
Lockloss ~19:30 UTC was due to rapid rise (about 10 min into 50W) of new ITMY PI at 18136 Hz. It's now become MODE24 and was damped the following lock with the PLL scheme.
First saw mode in the live broadband monitor (found on PI medm screen under the StripTool button). I identified the arm by looking at SUS-ETMX/Y_PI_DOWNCONV_DC2_SIG_OUT_DQ spectrum at time right before lockloss. I identified test mass by alternating matrix elements to send damping signal to ETMY (with no result) then ITMY. Screenshot of PLL, broadband monitor, and StripTools during successful damping are attached.
Another new PI at ETMX 17771 Hz, now MODE7.
Belongs to the Xarm though test mass is unknown so far. Rang up about 2 hours into 50W lock (five orders of mag above noise floor in OMC DCPD) and rang down on it's own before I noticed it. I set up damping scheme in MODE7 and its been added to StripTool.
Here is a table showing the current LHO simulink mdl files which have local modifications not checked into svn and/or have pending updates from the svn repository.
Note that the SUS MASTER common files are currently incompatible with the H1 sus models and should not be updated until we are ready to apply Stuart's changes.
file | local mods? | pending updates from repository | comments |
sus/common MC_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common OMCS_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common HSSS_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common HSTS_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common HLTS_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common SIXOSEM_F_STAGE_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common BSFM_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common PI_MASTER.mdl | YES | YES | possible conflict |
sus/common TMTS_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common QUAD_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common QUAD_ITM_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
sus/common SIXOSEM_T_STAGE_MASTER.mdl | no | YES | |
asc/common IAL_LOCKIN.mdl | no | YES | not used by any H1 model |
isc/common LSC_TRIGGER.mdl | no | YES | |
isc/common FILTBANK_TRIGGER.mdl | no | YES | |
lsc/common lsc.mdl | YES | no | DBB jitter FF? |
lsc/h1 h1lsc.mdl | YES | no | DBB jitter FF? |
sys/common IWAVE.mdl | no | YES |
SUS MASTER files have been made read-only to prevent accidental updates
We are baking out some PMC PZTs in the countertop air bake oven in the OSB lab. The oven is sitting on the counter against the long hall-way wall from the controlroom to the bootscrubber into the LVEA. The oven has a fan in it that runs although we have never deemed this as a noisy source for interferometry. I turned it on yesterday morning around 11am PT. I will turn the second countertop oven on that is next to it today and both ovens will run over the weekend. Please holler at me you anyone sees this as a problem, or if particle counts look funny in the OSB optics lab over the next few days.
Jonathan, Satya, Jim, TJ, Dave:
This morning we installed the new x509 certificate on h1fescript0 to replace the expired cert. We were then able to restart the ext_alert code on h1fescript0. This runs under monit management.
I have created an external alert overview medm screen, it is called from the SITEMAP via the SYS->'GRB/SN External Alert' pull-down. I pulled out the ext_alert parts from the CAL overview screen to make the screen (screenshot attached).
TJ verified that the audible alarms at the operator station are announcing these alerts.
Updated Virgo logbook links at top of page per FRS# 6465.
Measurements of the pre-modecleaner high voltage monitor with the pre-modecleaner locked and unlocked (see plot legend).
Per FAMIS #6868, ran & checked ISI CPS signals for the BSCs & HAMs. On both measurements (attached), no high frequency noise was observed.
Lost lock 3 times briefly after reaching NLN. Possibly ASC related. No PI modes seen ringing up on striptool. Decided to try an initial alignment and have not been able to get past ENGAGE_DRMI_ASC since. At different times both H1:LSC-TR_X_QPD_B_SUM_OFFSET and H1:LSC-TR_Y_QPD_B_SUM_OFFSET got bad values that hindered finding and fine tuning IR. 07:18 UTC Terra turning on ETMY ring heater for PI test later today (Thursday) 09:15 UTC NLN 09:18 UTC Lock loss. EY saturated and ASC signals (mostly DHARD pitch?) started ringing up before lock loss. 10:02 UTC NLN 10:06 UTC Lock loss. Again ASC signals started ringing up before lock loss. 10:48 UTC NLN 10:52 UTC Lock loss. Again ASC signals started ringing up before lock loss. 10:56 UTC Starting initial alignment. 11:56 UTC Initial alignment done. Kept losing IMC lock. Had to redo input align. SRC also had trouble locking. 12:22 UTC Despite initial alignment had to check MICH fringes and lock on PRMI. Locking on PRMI took moving PRM around. PRMI to DRMI transition worked, but lost lock before DRMI_LOCK state. 12:36 UTC Stopped at DRMI_ASC. Signals fell and loss lock again. Happened again. Stopping at LOCK_DRMI_1F. Seems stable here. Definitely ASC. 13:54 UTC Still can't get past DRMI_ASC. Starting another initial alignment. 14:09 UTC Peter to LVEA to take dark noise measurements and needs PMC unlocked. Stopping initial alignment after INPUT_ALIGN_OFFLOADED and set ISC_LOCK to DOWN. 14:57 UTC Peter done
Jim W, Kiwamu,
As pointed out by Patrick, DRMI ASC was causing the locklosses. It was due to the PRC1 loops (POP A QPD -> PRM loop) which had too large misalignment. Here is what we did to work around it.
Though, we don't know why we ran into this situation at this point.
Unless otherwise noted all powers measured with the water-cooled 300 W Ophir power meter. The ISS was unlocked but still diffracting light, whilst this does distort the beam it should be constant over the time scale of the measurements taken. Using the locking photodiode over a 5 minute observation time: locked: -260 mV to -262 mV unlocked: -1.001 V to -1.004 V Calculated visibility using the locking photodiode is thus: (74.0 +/- 0.4)% Using the power meter: locked: 30.5 W to 30.6 W unlocked: 121.6 W to 122.2 W Calculated visibility using the power meter is (74.9 +/- 0.3)% The power transmitted by the pre-modecleaner was 105.7 W to 106.1 W. Which suggests a pre-modecleaner cavity transmission of (86.9 +/- 0.2)%. The errors listed above are okay to the precision of the measurement and not its accuracy. Bearing in mind that the accuracy of the power meter is +/- 3%, the visibility measurement and transmission measurement are on the edge of agreement. Taking accuracy into consideration the visibility is then (75 +/- 4)% and the transmission is (87 +/- 5)%. The two measurements are in general agreement but are not very accurate nor precise.
Turning the ETMY ring heater on 0 --> 0.55 W top, 0 --> 0.55 W bottom at 7:25 UTC.
This is to revert alog 29702, bringing us back to a stronger optical mode overlap with the 47kHz ETMY mechanical mode so we can test the effectiveness of ESD damping at 50 W.
TITLE: 10/19 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Commissioning
INCOMING OPERATOR: Patrick
SHIFT SUMMARY: Struggled to lock a few times but eventually made it to NLN. Noise hunting continues on the commissioning side.
Sheila Kiwamu Jenne Daniel
We measured the OLG of the PMC loop with the interferometer unlocked, and saw that it is aroun 500Hz while it is supposed to be at around 5kHz. Plotting the measured OLG as closed loop supression, we predict that this loop should have gain peaking approximately around the frequency of our lump in DARM. (second attachment). We tried increaseing and decreasing the gain by 6dB, and didn't see much of a change in DARM.
However, a driven measurement using the newly amplified HV mon as a readback predicts that this noise is about a factor of 2 below DARM in our lump. The third and fourth attachments are the same noise injections that Jenne and I posted on monday for MICH SRCL and PZT jitter, with projections based on PMC PZT HV mon. Kiwamu found an alog from april, 26538 indicating that the gain should be set to 30 dB (it has been 16 dB for the last several months). The third attachment shows the noise projection with the PMC gain at 16dB, while the 4th one shows 30dB. The 5th screenshot shows the difference in the DARM spectrum with the increased gain.
People are still invesitgating the coupling mechanism, we think that intensity noise (which we think was the explanation for the simliar noise at LLO in 2014 16186) is ruled out by the intensity noise injection, although it is interesting to note that the spectrum of this PMC HV lines up fairly well with the ISS control signal.
According to various signals when the PMC HV was excited, we are concluding that this is not a coupling through intensity or frequency of the light. We don't know how the HV noise couples to DARM.
In the attached screen shot, the right two panels show various signals with and without a broad band excitation in the HV. The PMC control gain was at 30 dB throughout the measurements. The upper right panel shows an increase in the PDA spectrum (which has been used as the sensor for the inner loop), indicating that the ISS witnesses increase in the HV noise somehow. However, the second loop sensors don't really show increase in their noise level below 1 kHz. This means that RIN at OMC DCPD should be at 1e-10 RIN/sqrtHz which is a factor of 10 lower than shot noise because our RIN to RIN coupling from the interferometer input to OMC DCPD is roughly -40 dB. So this does look like an intensity noise coupling.
As for frequency noise, the situation seems similar to intensity. The CARM loop sees higher noise level in frequency according to REFL_CTRL_OUT in the lower right panel. However POP 9I, which is an out-of-loop frequency noise sensor, did not show any elevated noise at all below 1 kHz. Based on the coupling of POP 9I measured the other day (30610), POP 9I should show higher noise level by a factor of a few in order to explain the increased noise level in DARM by frequency noise. So it does not seem to be frequency noise coupling either.
I compared nominal PMC locking gain (red, green) and 6dB lower (blue, brown).
Due to gain peaking at 240Hz the feedback signal doesn't decrease below 400Hz.
Anyway, higher than 400Hz, I see some reduction in DARM when the gain was lower, but it seems as if the reduction was mainly at around the peak of the three bumps (440, 580 and 700 Hz). For example it seems as if there's no reduction of noise at 520Hz even though the feedback signal to PMC PZT was reduced by a factor of 4.
We can also see that DARM got worse at 240Hz by reducing the gain due to gain peaking.
Changing the PMC filter to allow us to lock at much lower UGF would help but the featureless bump might stay. The second plot is the same as the first one but the PMC PZT (dashed) is put on top of the DCPD (solid). PMC PZT is arbitrarily scaled so that the DCPD with high bandwidth PMC lock (red, green) looks like the SUM of DCPD with low bandwidth PMC lock (blue, brown) and PZT with high bandwidth PMC lock(pink, orange).
https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=30631 Satisfies FAMIS asset 364 maintenance
....just when I thought I understood FAMIS. I still need to "create request" to create a task associated with this asset created which already includes a schedule, procedure, and personnel assignment.
Another to-do that was discussed: Make-up air on/off test when IFO is locked.