Not sure if this was looked at earlier in the day, but CP4 has been in alarm off and on since 7:44AM PT.

Plot attached shows MX, CP5, not in alarm, on the left, and MY, CP4, going in and out of alarm on the right.

Second attachment is the alarm log.

The DBB shutter was opened to allow for more jitter measurements. The measurements are:

1. File B: In lock for a long time (>24h), we see jitter coherence with DARM around 500 Hz as high as 0.35.
2. File A: Moving to an alignment with higher power recycling gain (32 instead of 30.5) increased the coherence as high as 0.5.
3. File C: At the beginning of the next lock the coherence was around 0.15.
4. File D: Moving to the alignment with higher recycling gain increased this coherence to 0.35.

There is clear correlation where the alignment with higher recycling gain has a higher jitter coupling. There also seems to be some thermal effect where the interferometer initially has a lower coupling.

The calibration of the DBB QPD jitter is just the inverse of the sum divided by 60 to account for the PMC transmission. The jitter measured by the IMC WFS DC was scaled by 1/3 to match the measurement when the IMC was unlocked.

Looking at the comparison of jitter during O1 and now (alog 30581) as measured by the IMC WFS DC, one might expect that the HPO jitter can explain all excess low frequency jitter below 70 Hz. This seems to work fine for pitch, but not very well for yaw. The coherence between WFS B DC yaw with the DBB QPD channels isn't higher than 0.3.

The effect of the alignment change on the DARM jitter coupling makes one wonder, if there isn't a Gouy phase conspiracy, where the coupling of the periscope peak is mostly independent. The Gouy phase difference between the periscope peak and the HPO jitter seems to be roughly 120°, if we believe the WFS DC readbacks. MC_F and REFL_SERVO_CTRL mainly see jitter peaks after the PMC. The auxiliary length dofs don't see much more than the periscope peak itself. Only DARM seems to be sensitive to the HPO jitter.

State of H1: in DC readout, measured a2l, NLN, measured a2l

Activities:

• 00:14 - Gerardo returned from EX
• 00:30-0035 - a2l, but file needed an update, not completed
• 00:36-00:43 - a2l in DC readout start to finish, going to NLN
• 00:50 - set PI modes 3 and 26 gains to zero, after reaching NLN
• 00:54-01:01 - a2l in NLN, lower gains

4:10pm local

Took 2 min. to overfill from control room by increasing LLCV from 16% to 50%. I raised nominal to 17% for weekend.

Jim is doing some testing/studies on the tilt ISO dofs.  Please let these 10 diffs remain for now.  Be mindful of other changes of course but none should come up.

Attached are the ISC relief to HEPI; units are nanometers.  Finally, a complete tide cycle!  If only we had the iLigo predictor running.

Looks like we had plenty of head room on HEPI but it is interesting that the Yarm never went negative like the Xarm.  Not sure that means much at a day plus stretch.  Maybe some initial grab residual.  I expect it would start behaving after a few days lock

TITLE: 11/19 Day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
INCOMING OPERATOR: Cheryl
SHIFT SUMMARY: 26.6hr Lock ended 30min before the end of my shift. While it was locked we ran a2L a few times and Commissioners did some work when they could.
LOG:

• 16:09 Out of Observing to run a2L
• 16:19 Observing
• 17:09 Jeff changing high frequency roa,ing cal line
• 18:56 Out of Observing so Sheila can move PR3
• 20:22 Observing
• 21:02 Out of Observing
• 22:03 G-type test event
• 23:30 Lockloss after 26.5hrs. HAM6 tripped
• 23:32 Gerardo to EY to change IP address of pump

J. Kissel, D. Tuyenbayev

Analyzing the high-frequency data for the UIM that we took last night (LHO aLOG 31601), we find -- as previously suspected -- there is lots of dynamical resonant features in the UIM / L1 actuation stage; it definitely does NOT fall as f^6 to infinity as one might naively suspect. 

There are even more features than the (now anticipated; LHO aLOG 31432) broad impacts of the violin modes of the Sus Point-to-TOP wires (~311 Hz), and UIM-to-PUM wires (~420 Hz). We had seen hints of these features previously (LHO aLOG 24917), but here they are fully characterized out to 500 Hz with a combination of swept-sine (SS) and broad-band (BB) transfer function ratios (the calibration standard measurements of PCAL2DARM = C / (1+G) and iEXC2DARM = C A_i / (1+G)). The measurements yield the actuation strength of the UIM stage, in terms [m] of test mass displacement per [ct] of drive from the L1_TEST_L bank, which is the Euler-basis equivalent to DAC [ct]. To scale to [m/N], is a mere scale factor, measured to be 
     20/2^18 [V/ct] 0.62e-3 [A/V]* 1.7082 [N/A] = 8.08e-8 [N/ct] (see LHO aLOG 31344).


Via private communication in January this year, Norna suspects that 111 Hz feature is the first internal mode of the UIM blades, backed by a bench test of the blades at CIT which revealed a resonance at 109 Hz. No ideas on the 167 Hz mode though.

These high frequency dynamics continue to plague the estimate of the UIM actuation strength at DC using the traditional frequency-dependent sweep method, because these high frequency dynamics begin to affect the actuation strength at as low a frequency as ~30 Hz (LHO aLOG 31427), and any model fitting code gets totally distracted by these features. 

A challenge to the CSWG team: fit this transfer function above 20 Hz and create a set of zeros and poles that can be used as a "correction" filter to a model that falls off as f^6. This filter need not perfectly resolve the details of all of the high-Q features, but it must track the overall frequency dependence over the 20 - 500 Hz region well. I attach all of the measurements compressed onto one (discontinuous) frequency vector as an ascii in the standard DTT form of [freq re(TF) im(TF)]. To use: 
    >> foo = load('2016-11-17_H1SUSETMY_L1_Actuation_HighFreqChar_asciidump.txt')
    >> figure; loglog(foo(:,1), abs( foo(:,2)+1i*foo(:,3) ))
This data is also committed to the CalSVN repo here:
    /ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/ER10/H1/Results/Actuation/2016-11-17_H1SUSETMY_L1_Actuation_HighFreqChar_asciidump.txt
Kiwamu has already tried to create such a filter from the previous data (LHO aLOG 28206), but was limited by  that measurement's high-frequency bound falling between the 111, 137, and 167 Hz features. 

Details:

Analysis code:
    /ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/ER10/H1/Scripts/FullIFOActuatorTFs/process_H1SUSETMY_L1_HFDynamicsTest_20161117.m

Config files:
    IFOindepPars = '../../../Common/params/IFOindepParams.conf';
    IFOdepPars   = {'../../params/H1params.conf'};
    IFOmeasPars  = {'../../params/2016-11-12/H1params_2016-11-12.conf'};
    PCALPars = {'../../params/2016-11-12/measurements_2016-11-12_ETMY_L1_actuator.conf'};

Model:
    /ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/O2/DARMmodel/src/computeDARM.m

Will post the data for the fitting challenge later this afternoon.

Ed M., T.J.

22:28UTC

ED M., T.J S.

A test candidate was sent. The Audible alarm announced in the control room at 22:03UTC. The H1 Operator Sign-Off on the GracedB system was entered as "NOT OK" Status and the comment was "TEST"

J. Kissel

There's been renewed excitement about the relationship between the 1083.7 Hz calibration line and the surrounding, non-stationary PSL intensity/jitter noise coupling into the sensitivity. Namely, DetChar has seen glitching "around the 1 kHz calibration line." I had looked at this relationship briefly a few moons ago (see LHO aLOG 31035) and concluded these features were unrelated, and did not impact the use of the 1083.7 Hz line due to the intensity/jitter noise's convenient double-peak shape.  

I had thought I'd run an on/off test during that study, but rather than dig up the history, I find it easier to just run a new on/off test.

As such, I've turned OFF the 1083.7 Hz calibration line at Nov 18 2016 21:33:40 UTC, Nov 18 2016 13:33:40 PST, GPS 1163540037.

If we survive the EQ that's now hitting as I type this aLOG, I'll leave it OFF for an hour or two.

WP 6328

This morning we turned ON filaments of RGAs at EY and corner......from the control room! Gerardo will set the IP address for EX to complete WP. 

I was disappointed to find that we cannot connect to multiple devices at one time to monitor multiple scans in RGA software. Contacted vendor about this. Analog signal monitoring via CDS will help (ECR 1600307).

JeffK & HughR

This is to be ready for changes resulting from the A2L running on a regular basis.  While at it I snapped a view of the TMs L2 Drive Align L2P filter banks.

Whoever is in the chair next when we have to relock (days from now I'm sure...), please:

• Stop at DC Readout. Run a2l. Turn PI Mode 3 & 26 gain to zero. Record time in alog when you put gains to zero.
• Continue up as normal. 
• Once at NLN, run a2l again. Continue to watch PI modes and damp as necessary: if either mode gets above the noise floor in the StripTool, put back in Mode 3 gain = -3000 and/or Mode 26 gain = 3000. Record time in alog when you put gains back on.
• Let the mode(s) damp back down. Once back down and buried in the noise floor of StripTool, set that mode's gain to zero again. Play the same game of seeing if it rings up and putting back in the gain if needed and putting rough times in the alog.

Thanks a bunch - the past few days of everyone helping play this long timescale PI game has been super helpful. 

Beautifully high duty cycle over the past few says. Nice work team! 

Current Schedule Status:
Frequency    Planned Amplitude        Planned Duration      Actual Amplitude    Start Time                 Stop Time                    Achieved Duration
(Hz)         (ct)                     (hh:mm)                   (ct)               (UTC)                    (UTC)                         (hh:mm)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1001.3       35k                      02:00                   39322.0           Nov 11 2016 21:37:50 UTC    Nov 12 2016 03:28:21 UTC      ~several hours @ 25 W
1501.3       35k                      02:00                   39322.0           Oct 24 2016 15:26:57 UTC    Oct 31 2016 15:44:29 UTC      ~week @ 25 W
2001.3       35k                      02:00                   39322.0           Oct 17 2016 21:22:03 UTC    Oct 24 2016 15:26:57 UTC      several days (at both 50W and 25 W)
2501.3       35k                      05:00                   39322.0           Oct 12 2016 03:20:41 UTC    Oct 17 2016 21:22:03 UTC      days     @ 50 W
3001.3       35k                      05:00                   39322.0           Oct 06 2016 18:39:26 UTC    Oct 12 2016 03:20:41 UTC      days     @ 50 W
3501.3       35k                      05:00                   39322.0           Jul 06 2016 18:56:13 UTC    Oct 06 2016 18:39:26 UTC      months   @ 50 W
4001.3       40k                      10:00                   39322.0           Nov 12 2016 03:28:21 UTC    Nov 16 2016 22:17:29 UTC      days     @ 30 W (see LHO aLOG 31546)
4301.3       40k                      10:00                   39322.0           Nov 16 2016 22:17:29 UTC    Nov 18 2016 17:08:49 UTC      days     @ 30 W            
4501.3       40k                      10:00                   39322.0           Nov 18 2016 17:08:49 UTC                
4801.3       40k                      10:00  
5001.3       40k                      10:00

First attachment is the ASC changes accepted.  All the ones accepted are gains that have been rounded off to 4 places rather than 10.  I did miss one matrix value (circled) but I've corrected that in the file directly and reloaded that to the FE.  The 23 remaining differences are filters, offsets and matrix changes requiring more scrutiny.

For the LSC, the same applies.  There is one offset difference remaining--see attached.

J. Kissel, P. Thomas, J. Warner

We're having trouble get ALS locked after the corner station crashed this morning, so we took a look at the percentage of wrong polarization in the ALS fiber transmissions. Y was at an acceptable 2%, while X was a boardline 12%. Just to make ourselves feel better, Jim and Patrick adjusted and reduced the percentage to under 5% for both arms.

Out of curiousity, to see how often this needs doing, I took a 1 year trend. I don't have much to say about the results, hopefully someone who knows more about this system can draw conclusions. Also, there is interest in moving the fiber polarization adjustment out of the CER.