Displaying reports 55921-55940 of 83007.Go to page Start 2793 2794 2795 2796 2797 2798 2799 2800 2801 End
Reports until 18:01, Monday 20 June 2016
H1 ISC
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - posted 18:01, Monday 20 June 2016 - last comment - 18:01, Monday 20 June 2016(27838)
POWER-UP work

Peter, Stefan

 

We read up on alog # 20699, indicating that the main problem during power-up is a change of the MICH ASC error signal. That alog suggested mixing in A36I, but back then AS_A_RF36 was phased differently.

Thus we looked at the MICH_P signal in AS_A_RF36, and indeed confirmed that the signal is now in Q, as expected.

We thus set the following pitch matrix element for MICH:

        ISC_library.asc_intrix_pit['MICH', 'AS_B_RF36_Q'] = 1     # reduce from 2 to 1
        ISC_library.asc_intrix_pit['MICH', 'AS_A_RF36_Q'] = 0.666

With this setting we noticed that MICH_Y was unhappy - in particular the AS_A_RF36_Q_YAW signal grew tremendously during power-up. We confirmed my moving the BS that the same error signal combination as for MICH_P also made sense for MICH_Y, i.e. we used the following yaw matrix element for MICH:

        ISC_library.asc_intrix_yaw['MICH', 'AS_B_RF36_Q'] = 1     # reduce from 2 to 1
        ISC_library.asc_intrix_yaw['MICH', 'AS_A_RF36_Q'] = 0.666

These settings are now in the Guardian (including setting them to 0 in the DOWN state).

For reference, for SRCL we are using the following error signals:

        ezca['ASC-INMATRIX_P_6_3']=0 # off for now                        # AS_A_RF36_I
        ezca['ASC-INMATRIX_P_6_7']=1 # good enough for now    # AS_B_RF36_I
        ezca['ASC-INMATRIX_Y_6_3']=-1.5                                           # AS_A_RF36_I
        ezca['ASC-INMATRIX_Y_6_7']=1                                                # AS_B_RF36_I
 

We then noticed that the SRC1_Y top stage offloading resulted in a slow oscillation, indicating the the loop gain dropped enough to make the offloading oscillate. We have not fixed this in the Guardian yet.

We also used the TCS_ITMX_CO2_PWR and TCS_ITMY_CO2_PWR guardians to set the TCS power at 11W. This ramps the central heating down as the power comes up. This is currently only done in the guardian after the whole power-up is finished (i.e. in the COIL_DRIVER). For now, we did this by hand.

With this setting we were stably sitting at 11W until the 5.4 magnitude earthquate in Vanuatu hit.

=================================================================================

After the quake had settled down,  we went to 23W, and noticed that SRC1_Y now would prefer a different error signal:

ASA36_I to SRC1_Y: -1.5 (was -1.5) 
ASB36_I to SRC1_Y: 0.53 (was  1.0)   # (not in guardian yet)

We noticed that for large SRC1_Y offsets AS36_I seems to turn around - during one lock we even were able to keep it locked with opposite gain, al;though the sideband buildups were worse.

We also set

H1:TCS-ITMX_CO2_LSRPWR_MTR_OUTPUT = 0.2    # (not in guardian yet)
H1:TCS-ITMY_CO2_LSRPWR_MTR_OUTPUT = 0.0    # (not in guardian yet)

this slightly improved the sideband buildups.

We left it locked atr 25W to damp the violin modes out over night. Attached are screen shots of the ASC input matrix.

 


 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
jameson.rollins@LIGO.ORG - 01:22, Monday 20 June 2016 (27839)

An example of how to follow along at home, and how you can access the matrix elements a little cleaner using the guardian interactive shell:

servo:~ 0$ remote_epics -u jameson.rollins lho
IFO = H1
ifo = h1
SITE = LHO
site = lho
GATEWAY = lhoepics.ligo-wa.caltech.edu
jameson.rollins@lhoepics.ligo-wa.caltech.edu's password:

Connection to lhoepics.ligo-wa.caltech.edu established
Searching for a free port to use for EPICS CA transport
The script will randomly select some ports in an attempt to find
an available network port to send the EPICS data over.
Attempting to use port 27963 for EPICS
Forward attempt 1

Launching bash shell setup to access EPICS at LHO.
Use the 'exit' command to return to your regular environment.

servo:~ 0$ guardian -i ISC_LOCK
--------------------
aLIGO Guardian Shell
--------------------
ezca prefix: H1:
system: ISC_LOCK (/home/jrollins/ligo/src/userapps/isc/h1/guardian/ISC_LOCK.py)

MANAGER SYSTEM:
  nodes = NodeManager(['ALS_COMM', 'OMC_LOCK', 'LASER_PWR', 'ISC_DRMI', 'TCS_ITMX_CO2_PWR', 'TCS_ITMY_CO2_PWR', 'ALS_DIFF', 'ALIGN_IFO', 'ALS_YARM', 'SEI_BS', 'IMC_LOCK', 'ALS_XARM'])
Type 'nodes.init()' to initialize.

In [1]: ISC_library.asc_intrix_pit['SRC1', 'AS_A_RF36_I']
Out[1]: 0.0

In [2]: ISC_library.asc_intrix_pit['SRC1', 'AS_B_RF36_I']
Out[2]: 1.0


H1 PSL (PSL)
jeffrey.bartlett@LIGO.ORG - posted 10:44, Monday 20 June 2016 (27851)
PSL Chiller Flow & Pressure
Peter, Jason, Jeff B.   

   Posted are the 7 day trends of the PSL chillers. The Diode chiller looks OK. The Crystal chiller circuit shows a steady rise in pressure and a decrease in flow. Temperatures in all four heads remain constant. There are some differences in the head flows, which are not yet understood. 

   These changes in flow and pressure start on 06/06/16 after (1) the inline filters were changed and (2) the site was recovering from a 3 day power outage.

   We are going into the PSL during the Tuesday maintenance window to check the plumbing system. I am monitoring the pressure, flow, and temperature on a daily basis.           
Images attached to this report
H1 IOO (IOO, ISC)
cheryl.vorvick@LIGO.ORG - posted 10:41, Monday 20 June 2016 - last comment - 10:03, Friday 01 July 2016(27852)
IMC WFS centering on IOT2L - one more thing to note - pitch and yaw signals are swaped

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.

Comments related to this report
cheryl.vorvick@LIGO.ORG - 10:03, Friday 01 July 2016 (28115)

Keita cleared this up in his alog 27807.  The choice of pitch and yaw on the table for WFS matches ptich and yaw in the chamber, so on the table the pitch (yaw) adjustment on the steering mirror to the WFS corresponds to the yaw (pitch) DOF in chamber.

H1 General (AOS, SEI, SUS)
jeffrey.bartlett@LIGO.ORG - posted 10:16, Monday 20 June 2016 (27849)
OpLev 7 day Trends Famis #4680
   Attached are the OpLev trends for the past 7 days. SR3 Yaw has a bit of a downward trend, as does the ISI-HAM2 Yaw. ISI-HAM2 had a big bump up, but is back on trend line.  
Images attached to this report
H1 PSL
edmond.merilh@LIGO.ORG - posted 09:42, Monday 20 June 2016 (27847)
PSL Weekly 10 Day Trends FAMIS #6101

Here are the past 10 day trends for the PSL. Things appear relatively normal in terms of the ongoing degradation of power as the diodes grow nearer to the end of their "lives". As always, further in depth analysis can be offered by Jason O. or Peter K. Chiller particulars are being closely monitored by Jeff B.

Images attached to this report
H1 SEI
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 09:01, Monday 20 June 2016 (27845)
Monthly HEPI Pump Trends

FAMIS# 4521

Presures look normal. The drop is  from the power outage.

Images attached to this report
LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:35, Monday 20 June 2016 (27844)
Morning Meeting Minutes

SEI, SUS - Regular maint tomorrow.

Fac - Wind fence posts in, fabric on today.

Vac - CP5 acting up, ongoing investigation.

Clean - Move 2 crates with forklift tomorrow EY -> MY.

CDS - Cabling for BRS install, move power supplies in bier garten, minor maint issues, 5 more work stations in computer users room.

PSL - DBB work tomorrow.

H1 ISC
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - posted 03:52, Monday 20 June 2016 (27842)
Since I am going to miss the commissioning meeting tomorrow...

The interferometer was stably locked at 25W (23.3W measured) for the last 4h, and all violin modes are damped to nothing (actually better than in O1).

Here is what I think we should do next:

- The one attempt going to higher power was unlocked by the Izumi-Ballmer instability at the main pendulum frequency. Time to mitigate that - ISS 3rd loop?

- The quick attempt in thermal tuning that Peter and I did suggested that we had too much central heating. We should nail down the optimal thermal tuning.

- Also, time to switch OMC_PD whitening and impedance back to low-noise.

LHO VE
kyle.ryan@LIGO.ORG - posted 20:33, Sunday 19 June 2016 - last comment - 20:35, Sunday 19 June 2016(27835)
Testing alog
Last entry that I can read is from Saturday?
Comments related to this report
kyle.ryan@LIGO.ORG - 20:35, Sunday 19 June 2016 (27836)
I guess that it is working but that there hasn't been any entries - fair enough, just unusual  
H1 ISC (ISC)
jenne.driggers@LIGO.ORG - posted 01:54, Saturday 18 June 2016 (27832)
Increased HARD loop gains

[Jenne, Peter]

Tonight we were able to get to DC Readout, and increase the power to 10W.  While there, we measured all of the ASC HARD loops.  In order to get to 10W, we kept SRC1 open (already was written into the guardian), and had to move SRM to keep POP90 low (Evan said he didn't have to do that last time he was increasing the power).

We determined that CHARD Pit really had too little gain (Sheila and Haocun saw this in alog 27617, but weren't sure if they belived the measurement).  We increased the gain of CHARD Pit by 10dB, so now it goes to -60 rather than -21 in EngageReflPopWFS. 

We found that the boosts were different for Pit versus Yaw, but the more aggressive one (can't remember which was which right now) was too aggressive, so we made all the boosts be gentle single pole, single zeros. 

We tried the boosts, and they worked well at 10W (no OLG measurement taken though...).  They are now in the IncreasePower state of the guardian, coming on after the laser power is above 10W.

We tried to increase the power further, but both times we lost lock fairly quickly (once at 20W, and the second time at 15W).  It looks like the MICH ASC loop's error signal is no good at higher powers - it looks like the BS is being misaligned by the loop.  For the 15W loop I opened the MICH ASC loop when it became clear that it wasn't going well, and that let us hold the lock for marginally longer, but not by much.  "Not going well" means here that POP90 was increasing, but POP18 and AS90 were starting to decrease significantly.

As a side note, while at 10W I noted that the AS36I signals are still responsive to SRM, although the combination is definitely different from the 2W input matrix combo.

At this point, we need to get a better MICH error signal so that we can hold lock at higher powers.  We should consider something like alog 20699, where we altered the SRC1 and MICH input matrix values to deal with this change as we increase the power.  The old version of the guardian in the svn (ISC_LOCK rev 12339) has the values that we used to use.  Daytime-us are going to look at this.

Images attached to this report
H1 SUS (ISC)
nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - posted 00:27, Saturday 18 June 2016 - last comment - 02:50, Monday 20 June 2016(27830)
Violin mode damping guardian is up-to-date

As of June 18, 7:22 UTC. See Violin mode table for details.

Comments related to this report
stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - 03:06, Saturday 18 June 2016 (27833)

Added ETMX, mode 7 narrowband damping filter for 507.194Hz. Setting: FM1, FM3, FM4, g=+150 (or g=+450).

Thois damps by itself, as well as together with the (still 2-mode damping) ETMX mode 6. Setting: FM1, FM3, FM4, FM5, g=-100 (or g=-300).

 

Both are in the guardian. this damps both 509.194Hz and 509.159Hz.

stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - 20:10, Sunday 19 June 2016 (27834)

Fond an error in the VIOLIN_MOIDE_DAMPING state. In short, all gain settings for ETMX were actually applied to ETMY.

After that, the modes on ETMY were the biggest - in particular EY mode 5 ( 508.220Hz).

Turns out all the band-pass filters of EY mode 3,4 and 5 (508.146Hz, 508.206Hz, 508.220Hz) overlapped.

I changed  all three bandpass  filters to narrow-band filters, with zeros on the other modes. The following settings damp all 3 modes:

EY mode 3 ( 508.146Hz): FM1, FM4, Gain=-20

EY mode 4 ( 508.206Hz): FM1, FM3, FM4, Gain=-20

EY mode 5 ( 508.220Hz): FM1, FM3, FM4, Gain=-40

 

All these settings are in the Guardian.

Some notes:

- EY mode 5 ( 508.220Hz) is by far the hardest to damp (presumably rung up very high, but only a small couling to DARM). The daming setting above is the best among the 6 possible phase combinations.

- The filter for the 3 EY modes 3,4 and 5 (508.146Hz, 508.206Hz, 508.220Hz) are now narrowband, meaning that their impulse response has significant support out to ~3min.

- Additionally for all three modes the dampling drive slightly couples directly back into lenght,  resulting in an inital response that looks like driving the modes up. Together with the filter response time, the actual damping only becomes apparent after ~4min.

 

- I then also turned on IX mode 7 (502.621Hz): FM1, FM4, gain=50; and IX mode 8 (502.744Hz): FM1, FM3, FM4 gain=10; both worked just fine.

- The only modes that still need attention (i.e. they are not shrinking any further) are

    EX mode 2 (505.707Hz) / EX mode 3 (505.710Hz)

 

===============================================

As reference, here are the 3 band-pass filters:

EY mode 3 ( 508.146Hz): FM1, FM4, Gain=-20 :

zpk([-0;-0;-0;-0;-0;-0;0+i*508.206;0-i*508.206;0+i*508.086;0-i*508.086],
    [0.00392661+i*508.126;0.00392661-i*508.126;0.011182+i*508.129;0.011182-i*508.129;
    0.0167351+i*508.135;0.0167351-i*508.135;0.0197404+i*508.142;0.0197404-i*508.142;
    0.0197404+i*508.15;0.0197404-i*508.15;0.0167351+i*508.157;0.0167351-i*508.157;0.011182+i*508.163;
    0.011182-i*508.163;0.00392661+i*508.166;0.00392661-i*508.166],1e-36,"n")
gain(1.67)
 

EY mode 4 ( 508.206Hz): FM1, FM3, FM4, Gain=-20:

zpk([0+i*508.192;0-i*508.192;0+i*508.22;0-i*508.22],
    [0.00284641+i*508.202;0.00284641-i*508.202;0.00284641+i*508.210;0.00284641-i*508.210],1,"n")
butter("BandPass",4,508.192,508.22)gain(1.06229e+11)
gain(1.15269e-06)

EY mode 5 ( 508.220Hz): FM1, FM3, FM4, Gain=-40:

zpk([0;0;0+i*508.206;0-i*508.206;0+i*508.234;0-i*508.234],
    [0.00208372+i*508.212;0.00208372-i*508.212;0.00569283+i*508.214;0.00569283-i*508.214;
    0.00777655+i*508.218;0.00777655-i*508.218;0.00777655+i*508.222;0.00777655-i*508.222;
    0.00569283+i*508.226;0.00569283-i*508.226;0.00208372+i*508.228;0.00208372-i*508.228],-1,"n")
gain(-356.902,"dB")

 

stefan.ballmer@LIGO.ORG - 02:50, Monday 20 June 2016 (27840)

Added the following violin mode dampers to the guardian:

ITMY mode 4 (501.811Hz) FM1,FM4,FM5, gain=-100
ITMY mode 7 (504.804Hz) FM1,FM3,FM4. gain=+500
ETMY mode 2 (508.010Hz) FM1,FM4, gain=-40 (gain critical: x-talk with ETMY mode 3)
ETMY mode 8 (508.661Hz) FM1,FM3,FM4, gain=-500
ETMX mode 4 (505.805Hz) FM1,FM3,FM4, gain=-500
ETMY mode 6 (508.289Hz) FM1,FM3,FM4,FM5, gain = 500 (Note: gain oscillations kick in between gain=1000 and gain=1500 - as a result, this mode is probably the slowest daming one. )

This completes all fundamental violin modes - the violin monitor screen is now clean.

H1 SEI (SEI, SUS)
conor.mow-lowry@LIGO.ORG - posted 23:08, Friday 17 June 2016 - last comment - 14:57, Tuesday 21 June 2016(27823)
IFO-basis Suspoint motion sanity checks
Conor, Jeff K

Summary:
- Conversion of ISI Suspoint motion into the DoF basis works for the arms, with limited fidelity.
- Corner station DoFs seem not to work, possibly some problem with inclusion of the Beamsplitter.
- IPC communication between ISI and SUS at ETMY is spoilt somehow.

The GS-13s on stage 2 are used as witnesses for residual motion. Their outputs are calibrated to nm, and converted to suspension point motion using Euler matrices (Cart2Eul). The output is in the local suspension coordinates. For example, the channel 'H1:ISI-ITMX_SUSPOINT_ITMX_EUL_L_DQ' is the longitudinal motion of ITMX, which is along the normal vector pointing outward from the HR surface, in the global +X direction.

These suspension point motions are IPC'd to the OAF model, and in the case of the ETMs this involves some multiplexing/AI-filtering for communication down the arm. In OAF they are combined into the IFO degrees of freedom based on  T1500610 .

As a sanity check, I fetched the ISI-model Suspoint channels and matrix'd them into the IFO DoFs in Matlab, for comparison with the OAF DoF channels. For the arms (XARM, YARM, CARM, DARM), things seem to be somewhat okay. I confirmed this by eye, and then took the spectrum of the subtraction (attachment 1, CARM_Spectrum). The residual is consistent with the dynamic range of single-precision floats (about 10^9), at least at high frequencies. A quick software-only transfer function using four poles at 0.1Hz and white-noise injection in a spare filter bank shows a similar total dynamic range (attachment 2, DTT_dynamic_range). The anti-imaging filters, for transmission of the ETM signals along the arm, should allow a considerably smaller residual than we see at low frequencies, and I don't really know what else might cause this.

The corner station DoFs are substantially wrong, visible directly in the time series' (eg attachment 3, MICH_time_series). Since MICH only uses the ITMs (confirmed to be 'okay') and the Beamsplitter, presumably the difference arises there. PRCL and SRCL are similarly incorrect.

Document T1500610 has some minor errors in the Suspoint->IFO-basis definitions, but the current matrix has correct values as far as I could see. It also points to the Suspension model versions of the Suspoint motion, eg 'H1:SUS-ITMX_M0_ISIWIT_L_DQ', but the model uses the ISI versions. Initial testing revealed discrepancies between:
    'H1:ISI-ETMY_SUSPOINT_ETMY_EUL_L_DQ'
    'H1:SUS-ETMY_M0_ISIWIT_L_DQ'
visible in attachment 4 (ETMY_IPC_issue). The other 3 test masses didn't show this gross level of disparity.



Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
hugh.radkins@LIGO.ORG - 09:51, Monday 20 June 2016 (27848)CAL, DetChar, ISC

The problem with the corner station calculations are a model mapping error.  I pointed this out to Jeff but he must have thought I fixed it or he just spaced it out given his usual very full to-do list.  I've never edited the OAF model and did not feel comfortable doing so.  Attached is the errant part of the model.  The BS PRM PR2 and PR3 are all mis-mapped in this section.

Images attached to this comment
hugh.radkins@LIGO.ORG - 14:56, Monday 20 June 2016 (27857)

Dave, Conor, Jenne, Hugh

Jenne is fixing the mapping mis-wire for the corner station calculations.

Dave checked the data path and found the SUS and ISI versions of the CART2EUL matrix for the ETMY were not the same.  This looks likely to be the issue rather than an IPC problem.

I checked the values against the data file I used to populate the matrices for all the suspensions and it still agrees.  I suspect the values in the SUS ETMY matrix are out of date.

See alog 11036 for more details: Data file is

/opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isc/common/projections/ISI2SUS_projection_file.mat
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - 17:42, Monday 20 June 2016 (27866)

Here is some detail on the GS13 signal paths. The six GS13 signals coming out of the ISI model are split, with one set going via Dolphin IPC to the SUS system, and the other set going through the ETMn_CAL into the ETMx_SUSPOINT part, in which is passes through a CART2EUL matrix. The SUS model receives the six dolphin channels, passes these through the ISIINF part, then through its CART2EUL matrix into the ISIWIT.  It is these two CART2EUL matrices which have identical settings at ETMX and are slightly different at ETMY.

jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 08:37, Tuesday 21 June 2016 (27879)INS, SEI
J. Kissel 

I've compiled, installed, and restarted the OAF model with the SUSPOINT to IFO basis transformation bug fix, and committed the top level model, 
/opt/rtcds/userapps/trunk/isc/h1/models/h1oaf.mdl

Attached is a screen shot showing the current and correct channel ordering.
Images attached to this comment
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 11:05, Tuesday 21 June 2016 (27884)SUS, SYS
J. Kissel

I've also updated the SUS version of the ETMY CART2EUL matrix (i.e. H1:SUS-ETMY_M0_CART2EUL channels) with the values found in 
/opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isc/common/projections/ISI2SUS_projection_file.mat

that was apparently discrepant in only *some* of the rotational terms, and only by ~10%. I can't explain why these were off, and I'd trended the values for the past 850 days (with the stop time of June 2015, so I covered the time install time mentioned in LHO aLOG 11036) and they've not been changed. One of life's mysteries, I suppose. Fixed now!

For the record, the new values are 
| L |    |       0   -1.0000    0.2000         0   -0.2823         0  |  |   X  | 
| T |    |  1.0000         0    0.4294         0         0   -0.2823  |  |   Y  |
| V | =  |       0         0         0    1.0000   -0.4294    0.2000  |  |  RZ  |
| R | =  |       0         0         0         0         0   -1.0000  |  |   Z  |
| P |    |       0         0         0         0    1.0000         0  |  |  RX  |
| Y |    |       0         0    1.0000         0         0         0  |  |  RY  | 

brian.lantz@LIGO.ORG - 14:57, Tuesday 21 June 2016 (27892)
Also,
I posted some analysis of the relative motion between HAM2 and HAM3 in the DCC
https://dcc.ligo.org/G1601390

differential Z is really small.

differential X kind of sucks at the microseism. Not sure how much it matters for the IMC, but it is worth thinking about.
I think there is some fruitful work to be done here - if it would be useful to reduce the relative motion of the ISI tables in the corner at the microseism.
H1 SUS
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - posted 20:41, Friday 17 June 2016 - last comment - 03:34, Monday 20 June 2016(27822)
OMC satellite amp oscillation prevents us from damping OMC (Jenne, Keita)

We had an episode of really large beam motion at about 0.6Hz on OMC QPDs as well as OMCR QPDs but not on ASC_AS_C nor AS WFSs. It was very very slow to damp, and at some point it didn't damp further. It was clear that the OMC or OM3 was moving, but the motion didn't show up on none of OMC and OM3 OSEMs. But the OMC SD and RT OSEMs were super noisy.

On inspecting the spectrum of OSEMs, it was clear that the SD and RT OSEMs of OMC had a large broad band noise, the signature of the satellite amp oscillation. However, the difference is that we couldn't see the oscillation in kHz range even using the 16kHz channel (sorry no screen shot). Maybe the oscillation frequency got higher?

Anyway, apparently it has been like that since power outage (attached). Though it's not shown in the spectrum, we confirmed that the broadband noise was there every day after the power outage.

We disabled the OMC damping and the beam motion on OMC QPD immediately got quieter.

We went to the floor and power cycled the satellite amp for RT/SD of OMC (they're on the same box, everything else is on another one), and the noise went away.

Turned on the damping again and it worked fine, no excessive beam motion.

Apparently this happens even though all satellite amplifiers are "fixed". It's worth checking all OSEMs for all optics.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
andrew.lundgren@LIGO.ORG - 03:34, Monday 20 June 2016 (27841)DetChar, ISC, SUS
I made a PDF with spectra of all of the OSEMs. The green trace is after the power outage, the black is a reference time before. I used the same times as in Jenne's alog.

There's a turn-up in some quadrants of ETMX L2 at high frequency. IM3_M1_LL has a big broadband noise increase. ITMX L2 has a new peak at 3 Hz in all quadrants (it might be worth checking with faster channels in case this is aliasing). ITMY_L2_LR has a turn-up at high frequency. MC1_M3_UL has a small broadband noise increase. Obviously OM1, OM2, and OMC look terrible. PRM_M2_UR has a broadband noise increase. SR2_M1 LF and T1 look like they might have started glitching (bouncy shape in the spectrum).

A bunch of channels also have excesses at low frequency, but I don't know if that's a change in physical motion, or maybe it's a result of other things being unstable.
Non-image files attached to this comment
H1 ISC (ISC)
haocun.yu@LIGO.ORG - posted 18:51, Friday 17 June 2016 - last comment - 21:32, Sunday 19 June 2016(27820)
WFS re-centering and IMC measuremnets

Sheila, Cheryl, Haocun

 

We re-centered the WFS A and B this afternoon to fix the misalignment (alog27792). Both of them are centered around (0,0) now and we took measurements on the IMC.

The spectrum (measured at test 1) and transfer function (with 20dB gain) of the IMC were taken both before and after re-centering, but there were nearly no differences between them.

 

For the spectrum, several peaks are:

-55.5 dBm/Hz @ 197.5kHz

-85 dBm/Hz @ 87.5kHz

-83.7 dBm/Hz @ 25kHz

 

For the Transfer Function:

UGF @150kHz, and we have a bump close to 0dBm at higher frequency.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
rana.adhikari@LIGO.ORG - 21:32, Sunday 19 June 2016 (27837)

IMC loop gain measurements should always go up to 5 MHz. There can be EOM resonances as high as 2.5 MHz which, if unmonitored, can poke up and make another unity gain crossing.

H1 GRD
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:47, Friday 17 June 2016 - last comment - 09:15, Monday 20 June 2016(27819)
small change to LASER_PWR

Jenne, Nutsinee Sheila

We had trouble with locking the arm in IR for inital alingment, because PSL-POWER_SCALE_OFFSET was different from the input power.  We added a statement to the "IDLE" run state of LASER_PWR (the generator of states when not changing the power) that will adjust the normalization if it is more than 0.5Watts wrong. 

            if abs(ezca['PSL-POWER_SCALE_OFFSET'] - ezca['IMC-PWR_IN_OUTMON'])> 0.5:
                ezca['PSL-POWER_SCALE_OFFSET'] = ezca['IMC-PWR_IN_OUTMON']
 

Comments related to this report
edmond.merilh@LIGO.ORG - 09:15, Monday 20 June 2016 (27846)

I came to the realization, this fine Monday morning, that this was my fault. I adjusted the laser power down from 25W to 2W without using the PSL Guardian node. Lesson learned. Apologies to those involved in the solution for taking the time to discover and fix MY "oops".

H1 SEI (GRD)
jim.warner@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:26, Friday 17 June 2016 - last comment - 10:16, Monday 20 June 2016(27809)
Possible small code conflict in ISI guardian code

After Sheila's log about the BS causing locklosses, I wanted to check a few things in the guardian code and I found what looks like conflict in the code. In /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/guardian/  ISI_BS_ST2.py, line 4

ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([ ] , [ ])

the empty brackets at the end indicate the ISI is not set to restore any Cartesian locations.  This is supposed to be the code that sets what dofs are restored when the ISI re-isolates, and is particular to the beamsplitter.

However, in  /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/guardian/isiguardianlib/isolation/ CONST.py lines 102 (for BSC ST1) and 122 (for BSC ST2) both read

            CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS = ([], ['RZ']),

CONST.py is common code, and I would interpret this to mean that all BSCs are restoring a stored RZ location. This isn't a problem for the other BSCs, because they never change state, but if we turn on the ST2 loops for the BS, this code could force the ISI to rotate some after the loops come on. The attached trend shows the last ten days of the BS ST2 RZ setpoint and locationmon, and they track each other, so I dont think the BS is returning to some old RZ location, but someone who understands this code should explain it to me.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - 14:12, Friday 17 June 2016 (27810)

The CART_BIAS_DOF_LIST in the common code you could say is the "default" setting, but can be overwritten by the chamber node's local file (as is done here). The two empty lists in the local file show that there are no cartesian bias degrees of freedom being being restored.

A quick "grep CART_BIAS ./*.py" in (userapps)/isi/h1/guardian/ yields:



./ISI_BS_ST1.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], [])
./ISI_BS_ST2.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], [])
./ISI_ETMX_ST1.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], [])
./ISI_ETMX_ST2.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([],[])
./ISI_ETMY_ST1.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], [])
./ISI_ETMY_ST2.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([],[])
./ISI_HAM2.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], ['X', 'Y', 'Z', 'RX', 'RY', 'RZ'])
./ISI_HAM4.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], ['X', 'Y', 'Z', 'RX', 'RY', 'RZ'])
./ISI_HAM5.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], ['X', 'Y', 'Z', 'RX', 'RY', 'RZ'])
./ISI_HAM6.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], ['X', 'Y', 'Z', 'RX', 'RY', 'RZ'])
./ISI_ITMX_ST1.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], [])
./ISI_ITMX_ST2.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([],[])
./ISI_ITMY_ST1.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([], [])
./ISI_ITMY_ST2.py:ISOLATION_CONSTANTS['CART_BIAS_DOF_LISTS'] = ([],[])
 

So it seems that we only restore the bias on HAMs 2,4,5,6. Doing this for L1 shows all empty lists, if the version we have is up to date.

After talking to JIm, he suggests that we change the "default" value to be an empty list, to avoid any possible future mishaps. Just to reiterate though, it is currently not restoring any biases on any of the BSCs, only HAMs 2,4,5,6.

jameson.rollins@LIGO.ORG - 14:28, Friday 17 June 2016 (27812)

TJ's analysis is correct: the default is what's defined in the isiguardianlib/isolation/CONST.py, which currently specifies that the RZ cart bias should be restored during the second phase of the isolation.

You can change the default in the CONST.py, but any change has to be well corrdinated with LLO, since that configuration is common for them as well.

hugh.radkins@LIGO.ORG - 10:16, Monday 20 June 2016 (27850)

TJ missed HAM3 in the list of platforms restoring biases.  This miss of the grep is likely from some h1 files being in the common area rather than the H1 directory.

Displaying reports 55921-55940 of 83007.Go to page Start 2793 2794 2795 2796 2797 2798 2799 2800 2801 End