Tried to use PRC1 input offsets in pitch and yaw ro recover recycling gain, instead of SOFT imput offsets. While the carrier recycling gain responds to PRC1 input offsets similarl to soft offsets, the POP_18 couldnt care less. Thus I suspect none of these offsets is able to tackle the core issue.

The next thing to do is to verify that the POP18 signal is actually trustable, and not saturating,  If trustable, it will be the best indication of recycling cavity losses.

TITLE: 07/02 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Commissioning
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY: Commissioning continues. We have been sitting at NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE now for  1.5+ hours.
LOG:
fw1 has had at least a couple of restarts

Lost about 9.5hours on all DMT monitors.

23:40 - Gerardo to CP3

00:04 - Gerardo back.

Spent some time pulling together calibration numbers for AS, REFL and POP diodes, and makeing a total power budget.

Bottom line:

- The missing 20% power (8Watts!) is not coming out of any port, and thus must be absorbed in the interferometer.
- The way to distinguish loss in the recycling cavity and (280 times smaller) loss in the arms is to look at the sideband recycling gains.

Attached is a plot of power at each port, plus the power in the recycling cavity cast into cumulative arm loss (by multiplying with 279 power buildup and 95ppm round trip losses). Note that there is virtually no increase in AS power, and even a decrease in REFL power. the 8 missing Watts are absorbed in the interferometer.

Note that it is very difficult to distinguish arm losses from PRC losses using the carrier. However the two cenarios are very different for the sidebands - for arm losses both sideband hardly see anything. However, for PRC losses, the 9MHz sideband responds quickest, since it starts off with a hight recycling gain. The 2nd attached plot illustrats this. My money is on PRC losses.

The signals I picked for calibration are:

'H1:LSC-REFL_A_LF_OUTPUT':
0.1*0.5^3*(1-800e-6)^3*1000 = 12.47  mWatt REFL (=cts) / Watt from IFO
10% beam spplitter
two 50% beam splitter
three 800ppm loss mirrors
50% beam splitter
1000mW/W

'H1:LSC-POP_A_LF_OUTPUT':
229e-6*0.1*1e6 = 22.9 uWatt POP (=cts) / Watt in PRC
229 ppm of PR2
10% beam splitter
1e6uW/W

'H1:ASC-AS_C_SUM_OUTPUT':
0.965*800e-6*0.48*0.8*997*10^(36/20)*1638.4 = 3.0554e+04 cts / Watt from SRM
0.965 Faraday transmission
800ppm transmission mirror
48% beam splitter
0.8 Quantum Efficiency
997 Ohm transimpedance
36dB whitening gain
1638.4 cts/V ADC
Note: This calibration has the most estimate factors in it. I don't rust it better than ~25%.

'H1:OMC-DCPD_A_OUTPUT' & 'H1:OMC-DCPD_B_OUTPUT':
0.965*(1-800e-6)^2*0.99*0.93*0.5*0.85817*0.9*1000 = 343 mA / Watt carrier 00 mode from SRM
0.965 Faraday transmission
two 800ppm loss mirrors
1% loss mirrir
93% OMC transmission
50% splitter
0.85817 A/Watt ideal
90% Quantum Efficiency (is this right?)
1000mA/A

I broke lock turning the ETMX ESD low pass filters on.  I put them on as I had a feeling that this help PI damping yesterday and the ETMX 15541Hz mode was out of control and would broken lock.
We have now put this change into the LOWNOISE_ESD_ETMY gaurdian state along with the request for the ETMX_PI_DAMPING state from the SUS_PI gaurdian. 

LLCV bypass valve 1/2 turn open, and the exhaust bypass valve fully open.

Flow was noted after 56 seconds, closed LLCV valve, and 3 minutes later the exhaust bypass valve was closed.

Jeff K, Darkhan

Summary

Three DQ channels need to be added to the H1SUSETMY front-end model:

H1:SUS-ETMY_L1_CAL_LINE_OUT_DQ
H1:SUS-ETMY_L2_CAL_LINE_OUT_DQ
H1:SUS-ETMY_LKIN_P_LO_DQ

Details

SUSETMY model (both at H1 and L1) was updated to use synchronized oscillators to inject calibration lines into L1, L2 and L3 actuation stages to track temporal variations in the strengths of the drivers (LHO alog 27733). An additional calibration line is injected through Lock In oscillator (see attached screenshot 1).

In order to analyze time-dependent calibration of the drivers we need the excitation signals to be stored in the frames.

Hopefully, we will update the H1SUSETMY model on next Tuesday, Jul 5, 2016.

TITLE: 07/01 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Commissioning
INCOMING OPERATOR: TJ
SHIFT SUMMARY:  Tough day for locking.  Several issues involving the DOWN state of ISC_LOCK as TJ has noted yesterday.  Also new issue where the DOWN state caused the FSS to oscillate when attempting to do initial alignment.  Still babysitting SRM during ENGAGE_SOFT_LOOPS and INCREASE_POWER.
LOG:

Chandra to LVEA looking for serial numbers.  I forgot to record the time, but it didn't effect locking.
 

Kiwamu, Nutsinee

DIAG_MAIN complained about HWSY having bad peak counts so we investigated. The first plot shows both HWS mean sled power and peak counts trend over the past 60 days. *HWSY sled is losing 23 mW per day (running at 103 mA current) while HWSX sled is losing 6.5 mW per day (running at 98 mA current). HWSY SLED was replaced back in April 26th, 2015.

Here I attached screenshots of what the stream images looks like right now for both HWSX (right) and HWSY (left). The bright spots on HWSY stream images are not as bright compared to HWSX, suggesting that the low number of peak counts is caused by the deterioration of the sled power ("peak counts" are refered to number of red spots around the center).

We have some spares (I think Y sled is 840 nm. We have three of those). One thing we could do here is to replace the sled next Tuesday so we can get some useful (live) data during ER9.

Commissioners are using TCS HWS to investigate any unexpected absorbtion of the ITM optics. It can be use to look at the affect of the CO2 heating real time. So it's important to keep this thing running.

I keep the HWSY code running for now since Aidan was able to use the recorded data for offline analysis.

----------

*Later I found out that the power calibration now is slightly off from calibration back in March 1st (alog25806). The below I attached the calibration as of today (Been these values since March 23rd). HWSY calibration stays the same but the rate of power loss per day for HWSX would be overestimated by ~30%. This also affects the previous analysis of sled power deterioration in alog26341 slightly.

I looked at 1 hour of the input power / IMC power oscillations that occurred last weekend and how that power change effected the alignment of the IO IMs, IM1, IM2, IM3, and IM4.

4 attachments: 

• PSL power in / IMC trans
• IM1-4 length: span of the y axis is 0.6urad on all plots - all IM optics show the oscillation in length, amplitude of the signal is largest in IM2
• IM1-4 pitch: span of the y axis is 0.45urad on all plots - IM2 clearly shows the oscillation while IM1, IM3, and IM4 do not - IM1 shows jumps in alignment up to 0.1urad - IM2 amplitude is ~0.25urad (p-p)
• IM1-4 yaw: span of the y axis is 0.6urad on all plots - IM2 clearly shows the oscillation while IM3 and IM4 do not - IM1 shows some oscillation but also jumps in the alignment - IM2 amplitude is ~0.25urad (p-p)

One explanation for the difference of IM2 compared to IM1, IM3, and IM4, is that the beam on IM2 is no longer centered, so the change in IMC power causes the optic to change alignment.

If this is true, the change of the beam centering on IM2 could be big enough to have significantly changed the alignment of the beam through the Input FI.

On Tuesday afternoon, July 5, I plan to update the code on all of the Beckhoff vacuum controls computers (h0vaclx, h0vacly, h0vacmr, h0vacmx, h0vacmy, h0vacex, h0vacey). This is to use the new PID controller that has been installed and tested at end Y and mid X.

This will trip the ESD high voltage at end X and end Y. Also the cold cathode gauges will turn off and may take some time to refire.

This falls under WP 5972.

J. Kissel, J. Driggers, T. Shaffer, D. Tuyenbayev, E. Goetz, K. Izumi

Over two ~1-2 hour lock stretches, I've managed to get the measurements needed for a baseline calibration update for ER9. Complete success! We'll work on the data analysis tomorrow, but I list the locations where all measurements have been committed to the CAL repo below. 

Of particular notes for the configuration of the IFO while doing these measurements:
- The OMC DCPDs have *no* stages of whitening employed. We've decreed that given the unknown success rate of PI damping over the next few days, it's more robust to leave the whitening off. We're not gaining too much in the high frequency end of the sensitivity anyways.
- All suspensions, including ETMY, have had their PUM stage switched to "Acq ON, LP OFF," i.e. state 2, or the highest range (i.e. not low noise). After some digging, Jenne found this was changed for some reason about a month ago, and maybe a setting that got lost in the power outage or something. 
I don't think either of these seemingly detrimental configurations are all that bad for ER9, given the bigger sensitivity issues elsewere.

Also note, in order to break the correlations we've found in O1 data between measurements of Actuation Stage Strength (see e.g. LHO aLOG 28096), I've taken an independent PCAL2DARM sweep for every isolation stage.

Measurements needed for Sensing Function:
/ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/PreER9/H1/Measurements/PCAL/
2016-07-01_H1_PCAL2DARMTF_4to1200Hz_SRCTuned.xml
    Exported as:
    2016-07-01_PCALY2DARMTF_4to1200Hz_A_PCALRX_B_DARMIN1_coh.txt
    2016-07-01_PCALY2DARMTF_4to1200Hz_A_PCALRX_B_DARMIN1_tf.txt

/ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/PreER9/H1/Measurements/DARMOLGTFs/
2016-07-01_H1_DARM_OLGTF_4to1200Hz_SRCTuned.xml
    2016-07-01_H1_DARM_OLGTF_4to1200Hz_A_ETMYL3LOCKIN2_B_ETMYL3LOCKIN1_tf.txt
    2016-07-01_H1_DARM_OLGTF_4to1200Hz_A_ETMYL3LOCKIN2_B_ETMYL3LOCKIN1_coh.txt
    2016-07-01_H1_DARM_OLGTF_4to1200Hz_A_ETMYL3LOCKIN2_B_ETMYL3LOCKEXC_tf.txt
    2016-07-01_H1_DARM_OLGTF_4to1200Hz_A_ETMYL3LOCKIN2_B_ETMYL3LOCKEXC_coh.txt


Measurements needed for Actuation Function:
/ligo/svncommon/CalSVN/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/PreER9/H1/Measurements/FullIFOActuatorTFs/
2016-07-01_PCALYtoDARM_FullLock_L1.xml
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_PCALYtoDARM_ForL1Drive_FullLock_tf.txt
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_PCALYtoDARM_ForL1Drive_FullLock_coh.txt

2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L1toDARM_FullLock.xml
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L1toDARM_State1_FullLock_tf.txt
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L1toDARM_State1_FullLock_coh.txt


2016-07-01_PCALYtoDARM_FullLock_L2.xml
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_PCALYtoDARM_ForL2Drive_FullLock_tf.txt
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_PCALYtoDARM_ForL2Drive_FullLock_coh.txt

2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L2toDARM_FullLock.xml
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L2toDARM_State2_FullLock_tf.txt
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L2toDARM_State2_FullLock_coh.txt


2016-07-01_PCALYtoDARM_FullLock_L3.xml
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_PCALYtoDARM_ForL3Drive_FullLock_tf.txt
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_PCALYtoDARM_ForL3Drive_FullLock_coh.txt

2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L3toDARM_LVLN_LPON_FullLock.xml
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L3toDARM_LVLN_LPON_FullLock_tf.txt
    2016-07-01_H1SUSETMY_L3toDARM_LVLN_LPON_FullLock_coh.txt

Between yesterday and today, Gerardo and I successfully bonded the ears to core optic mass ETM15, destined for LLO for post-O1 eventual replacement. 

Ear s/n 195 bonded to S3 flat of mass June 29, 2016

Ear s/n 196 bonded to S4 flat of mass June 30, 2016

The first ear (s/n 195) has a series of bubbles along it's edge, but the surface area of these do not add up to more than the allowed amount as per E1000277, so it passes, see pix attached.

The second ear (s/n 196) has no bubbles and is nice full bond. 

biggest = prm pitch changing by 2.5urad

close second = im4 pitch changing by 1,15urad

plot and chart of top 16 optics/DOFs attached

Kiwamu, Stefan

We were trying to nail down what is responsible for the Power Recycling Gain change during power-up, so we went through the whole sequence slowly, and gave the system time to settle in each state:

All times UTC of 20160629:

- 18:54:37 / Green dot: Power-up starts from 2Watt to 10Watt
- 19:00:32 / Red dot: Power-up restarts from 10Watt to 40Watt
- 19:06:10 / Black dot: : Power-up to 40W finishes, but additional SOFT offsets remain left off.
- 19:10:15 / Blue dot: Soft offsets in yaw start ramping on over 2 minutes
- 19:12:17: Soft offsets ramp in yaw is done
- 19:15:17: Soft offsets in pit start ramping on over 3 minutes
- 19:18:19: Soft offsets ramp in yaw is done
- 19:21:20: End of undisturbed period - guardian continued
 

In particular, we now there is a significan power recycling gain improvement with a soft yaw adjustment of the x-arm. Additionally, the beam splitter cannot affect the relative alignment of x-arm and power recycling cavity. SO attached are only yaw signals from x-arm and power recycling cavity.

Conclusions:

- During the very first step in power up (green dot) there is a momentary shift in PRM yaw and IM4 yaw, but it does not continue during the additional power increase.
- During the main power increase (between red dot and black dot). There is a consiostent signature in the ETMX control, oplev and IR camera signal, sggesting that we are slightly moving the x-arm with the ASC system. THe ITMX doesn't see much of this in control signal and oplev signal (its camera is broken and not plotted). However no significant motion is visible in any of the power recycling cavity mirrors (this includes PR2, which is not plotted).
- Once we start moving the soft loops with soft offsets, ETMX, ITMX, PR3 and BS clearly respond. Interestingly, the ETMX moves to the same direction as during the power increase.

While we were centering WFSA and WFSB we discovered that adjusting the beam in pitch shows up as yaw on the WFS medm, and adjusting the beam in yaw shows up as pitch on the medm.

It's unclear how long this has been the situation.