Displaying reports 57321-57340 of 78019.Go to page Start 2863 2864 2865 2866 2867 2868 2869 2870 2871 End
Reports until 08:36, Sunday 06 September 2015
H1 General
edmond.merilh@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:36, Sunday 06 September 2015 - last comment - 11:08, Sunday 06 September 2015(21252)
Shift Summary -Day (arrival)

Arrival:

Comments related to this report
edmond.merilh@LIGO.ORG - 09:26, Sunday 06 September 2015 (21253)

16:26UTC - Interestingly, the range has trended back up to 71.5Mpc despite no noticeable downward trend in the microseism.

nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - 11:08, Sunday 06 September 2015 (21254)
I forgot to turn on the second stage OMC whitening btw.
LHO General
patrick.thomas@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:08, Sunday 06 September 2015 (21251)
Ops Owl End Shift Summary
~13:00 - 13:09 UTC Stepped out of control room.
14:49 UTC dust monitor invalid alarm at end X

Remainder of shift quiet. Range seems to be slightly dropping with slow increase in microseism.

Handing off the Ed.
LHO General
patrick.thomas@LIGO.ORG - posted 04:05, Sunday 06 September 2015 (21249)
Ops Owl Mid Shift Summary
07:12 UTC Handoff from Nutsinee. H1 in observing mode at around 70 Mpc. Kiwamu only other person here.
07:16 UTC Lights are off in the LVEA and PSL enclosure. Lights appear to be off at the mid and end stations.
07:17 UTC Checked IP9. Both A and B pumps HV around 7kV.
07:53 UTC Momentary end X HEPI pump station pressure minor alarm.
08:52 - 08:58 UTC Stepped out of control room.
09:06 UTC Kiwamu leaving site. I'm alone.
10:50 - 10:57 UTC Stepped out of control room.

No lock losses or changes in observing mode. SUS ETMY saturations at 08:44:54 and 11:00:19 UTC.
H1 CAL
kiwamu.izumi@LIGO.ORG - posted 01:43, Sunday 06 September 2015 - last comment - 20:05, Monday 07 September 2015(21250)
some updated on analysis codes for suspension calibration

I worked a bit more on the analysis codes that Jeff has written (alog 21015 and alog 21049). I was not able to finish deriving the suspension scale factors. Tomorrow, Jeff and Darkhan will pick up them at the point where I left and will continue working on it.

Major updates:

Next steps:

 

Some notes:

In the course of the code update, I changed the file organization structure of the ALS diff and Pcal scripts so that they have only one analysis code which can be invoked by specifying a set of data parameters. This organization approach is the same as those for the DARM open loop analysis.

As for ALS diff, the core analysis code is

aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/ER8/H1/Scripts/ALSDiff/Matlab/analyze_alsdiff.m

and the parameter files are in the same directory and named as

H1ALSDIFFparams_20150826.m

H1ALSDIFFparams_20150828.m

H1ALSDIFFparams_20150829.m

As for Pcal, the core analysis code is

aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/ER8/H1/Scripts/PCAL/analyze_pcal.m

and the parameter files are in the same directory and named as

H1PCALparams_20150826.m

H1PCALparams_20150828.m

H1PCALparams_20150829.m

Each parameter file loads H1DARMOLGTFmodel_ER8 with the latest electronics information and subsequently returns the parameter structure, or the familiar variable "par". As usual the parameter structure can be then fed to the analysis code (e.g. analyze_alsdiff.m or analyze_pcal.m) as an input argument. I have not carefully thought about the final return variables from the core analysis codes, but in principle we can write them such that they return the calibrated suspension transfer functions in meters/counts together with some error bars and also perhaps some statistical values. In this way, the final step of performing apple-to-apple comparison between various measurements from various dates can be less painful.

I tried propagating the same file organization structure to the free-swinging Michelson codes, but apparently I am running out my energy for the night and did not finish it yet.

Comments related to this report
kiwamu.izumi@LIGO.ORG - 17:35, Monday 07 September 2015 (21274)

Today, I worked on the analysis code for the free-swinging Michelson which was something I was not able to finish the other day. They are now organized and analyzed in the same fashion as the rest analysis codes (i.e. DARMOLGTFs, ALS diff and Pcal).

The core analysis code can be found at:

/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/ER8/H1/Scripts/FreeSwingMich/analyze_mich_freeswinging.m

In the same way as the ALS diff and Pcal analysis codes, the analysis code can be fed with a parameter sturcture or "par". The parameter structure can be loaded by running a paramter script which is separated by the measurement date:

/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/ER8/H1/Scripts/FreeSwingMich/H1FSMparams_20150826.m

/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/ER8/H1/Scripts/FreeSwingMich/H1FSMparams_20150828.m

/aligocalibration/trunk/Runs/ER8/H1/Scripts/FreeSwingMich/H1FSMparams_20150829.m

darkhan.tuyenbayev@LIGO.ORG - 20:05, Monday 07 September 2015 (21279)CAL

H1 SUS ETMY PUM driver analysis has been alogged in LHO alog 21232.

H1 General
nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - posted 00:00, Sunday 06 September 2015 (21242)
Ops EVE Summary

(All time in UTC)

23:00 The interferometer is down. Take over from Ed.

23:51 Dick to optics lab

23:56 IMC had trouble locking. MC2 pitch seems to have moved the most from the time the ifo was still locking so I touched it and managed to get IMC locking again. Ed had to touch ITMY to get the green to lock, fearing that this might give me trouble during DRMI afterward I reverted his changes and tried adjusting ETMY and gave TMSY a small touch.

00:36 Wind reached 40 mph. I adjusted PR3 to maximize COMM beatnote. Can't really do much at this point. Waiting until the wind calm down.

01:20 Dick to LVEA.

01:38 Dick back

01:51 Robert to LVEA

01:55 Robert back

02:11 After trouble locking DRMI AND PRMI, I decided to do initial alignment. I didn't see that Patrick already did this last night.

03:24 After the inital alignment locking DRMI still seems hopeless. Locking PRMI.

03:48 PRMI also have difficulty locking. I adjusted BS, PRM, PR2. Adjusting PR2 seems to be the most effective. Maybe adjusting BS and PRM wasn't necessary...

04:20 PRMI is good but I still can't get the DRMI to lock.  I've been adjusting SRM pitch and yaw but no luck. Not sure what on earth is going on. POP18 and POP90 is flashing high so I know the PRMI is good.

04:25 I noticed that SR3_CAGE_SERVO wasn't engaged. I think it HASN'T been engaged this whole time that I was having problem with DRMI. It saw SR3 misaligned at some point and never turned itself back on. SR3_CAGE_SERVO supposed to correct SR3 misalignment due to interferometer heating/cooling. Otherwise locking DRMI will be a problem. So, note to self, MAKE SURE THE CAGE_SERVO IS ON!!!

04:29 ISC_DRMI Connection Error. I called Jenne and it was an easy fix. Just request STOP, and EXEC again at ISC_DRMI. DRMI is now locking again (thank goodness).

04:47 Locked at NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE. Back to Observing. 71 Mpc (hooray!).

05:00 Kiwamu arrived doing calibration work.

07:00 Wind below 20 mph. The saturation alarm hasn't been complaining much. Handing off to Patrick.

 

Note:

- I checked and the SR3_CAGE_SERVO wasn't turned off until I started the initial alignment. Whatever was giving me hell with DRMI and PRMI earlier wasn't the cage servo. But to be fair I didn't touch any optics in trying to fix PRMI before I went and did the initial alignment (PRMI never had trouble locking itself in my experience!). I guess I should have...

- I have been getting calls from an unknown number all day and nobody talks when I answered. The last call was just a few minutes ago. It's really annoying....

H1 General
nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - posted 21:48, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21247)
Back to Observing

04:47 UTC at 71 Mpc.

H1 CDS (DAQ)
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 19:54, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21244)
CDS model and DAQ restart report, Friday 4th September 2015

ER8 Day 19, no restarts reported

H1 General
nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:50, Saturday 05 September 2015 - last comment - 21:29, Saturday 05 September 2015(21243)
Windy!

After I got the IMC back up (it had trouble locking itself so I touched MC2 pitch a little), the wind picked up speed. It has just reached 40 mph and the forecast says it should come down in 3 hours or so. I'm waiting for the wind to calm down before moving on. Hopefully I don't have to wait 3 hours...

Comments related to this report
nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - 21:23, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21245)

Difficulty with DRMI

2:11 UTC After almost an hour not able to lock DRMI and PRMI, I decided to do the initial alignment (this was before I saw Patrick alog that he already did one last night). After the initial alignment the PRMI still wasn't able to lock itself. I had to touch BS, PRM, and PR2.

4:20 PRMI is good but I still can't get the DRMI to lock.  I've been adjusting SRM pitch and yaw but no luck. Not sure what on earth is going on. POP18 and POP90 was flashing high so I know the PRMI was good.

nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - 21:29, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21246)

ISC_DRMI CONNECTION ERROR

I called Jenne and was able to cleared the error easily. I just noticed that SR3_CAGE_SERVO wasn't engaged. Turned it on and DRMI is locked again.

Images attached to this comment
H1 ISC (ISC, SUS)
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:52, Saturday 05 September 2015 - last comment - 20:07, Tuesday 08 September 2015(21240)
ETMY drive upconservsion

Kiwamu, Sheila, Evan

Durring the calibration activities last week Kiwamu noticed that there was upconversion of the drive from ETMY.  Specifically when he drove in the L3 LOCK filter, he saw a second harmonic. When he drove each stage individually, through the test filter bank with a similar amplitide he saw no evidence for upconversion.  This suggests that the upconversion might come about by driving mutliple stages, or through the length 2 angle paths. 

We went back through the data and looked at the relative heights of the peaks.  We also calculated a ratio of the amplitude of the second harmonic to the square of the amplitude at the fundamental :
  ASD(2f) = alpha * (ASD(1f))^2

drive Frequency (Hz_ amplitude at drive frequency (m/rt Hz) amplitude at second harmonic (m/rt Hz) alpha (1/m)
4.98 5.8e-14 2e-15 5.9e11
5.9 5.6e-14 9.8e-16 3.1e11
6.4 3e-14 2.8e-16 3.1e11
10 3.6e-15 2.8e-18 2.2e11

If we ignore other frequencies which could mix and only consider the second harmonics of DARM control, we would expect this upconversion to be something like a factor of 10 below our measured noise at 20 Hz, and near the measured noise at 10 Hz.

The next step is probably to identify which stages contribute to this upconversion, for example it seems probable that this is only noticeable for frequencies where L2 get a significant fraction of the DARM control signal. 

Comments related to this report
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - 20:07, Tuesday 08 September 2015 (21316)

We made some injections into ETMY to check when exactly this upconversion shows up.  It is much smaller today than it was durring Kiwmau's measurement.  

An injectionat 5 Hz  (500 counts in ISCINF) that increased the DARM noise there by a factor of 67 produced a peak at 10 Hz that is a factor of 2.6 above the noise floor.  We also injected in L2 L2L (which will bypass the L2P and L2Y filters) to produce a simlar peak, and got a similarly low level of noise at 10 Hz.  

It may be that part of the problem durring Kiwamu's measurement was that some ASC loops were accidentaly off. 

Images attached to this comment
H1 General
edmond.merilh@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:21, Saturday 05 September 2015 - last comment - 16:56, Saturday 05 September 2015(21239)
End of Shift Summary and Lock Log - Day

Summary:

 

ACTIVITY LOG:

 

LOCK LOG:

Comments related to this report
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - 16:56, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21241)

The guardian checks for locklosses of the mode cleaner and DRMI, and it is just a roll of the dice which it will noticed first.  In the early stages of lock acquisition it makes sense to proceed to LOCK_DRMI if only DRMI has lost lock, that saves us from unecesarily relocking ALS.  In full lock I agree tihs doesn't really make sense, but if the guardian goes to LOCK_DRMI after a lockloss it will imediately proceed to lockloss as you saw.

H1 General
edmond.merilh@LIGO.ORG - posted 15:17, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21238)
Lockloss

22:03UTC LockLoss after PRM saturation. Wind has increased gusting to ~30 at times. Not sure what caused the break. Trying to re-align ALS.

H1 General
edmond.merilh@LIGO.ORG - posted 11:59, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21237)
Arrival/Mid-Shift Update: DAY

ALL TIMES IN UTC

Arrival:

Mid-Shift Summary:

 

LHO General
patrick.thomas@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:14, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21236)
Ops Owl End Shift Summary
11:28 UTC Dan left. All alone.
13:08 UTC Checked IP 9. Both A and B Pumps high voltage near 7 kV.
13:44 UTC Lost lock, earthquake 4.5 154km S of Atka, Alaska 2015-09-05 13:04:34 UTC39.0 km deep
14:16 UTC Restarted alarm script on video5: line 139 in lock_end science = seconds_to_hms(sum(science_segs)) NameError: global name 'seconds_to_hms' is not defined
14:40 UTC Back to observing mode, range is down around 60 Mpc. Is this left over from earlier problem Dan ran into?

In observing mode around 60 Mpc. Handing off to Ed.
H1 ISC (ISC)
daniel.hoak@LIGO.ORG - posted 04:07, Saturday 05 September 2015 - last comment - 13:27, Monday 14 September 2015(21234)
Input beam jitter coupling to DARM

Dan, Evan

This evening we made a qualitative study of the coupling of beam jitter before the IMC into DARM.  This is going to need more attention, but it looks like the quiescent noise level may be as high as 10% of the DARM noise floor around 200Hz.  While we don't yet understand the coupling mechanism, this might explain some of the excess noise between 100-200Hz in the latest noise budget.

We drove IMC-PZT with white noise in pitch, and then yaw.  The amplitude was chosen to raise the broadband noise measured by IMC-WFS_A_I_{PIT,YAW} to approximately 10x the quiescent noise floor.  This isn't a pure out-of-loop sensor, and since we were driving the control point of the DOF3 and DOF5 loops of the IMC alignment channels we will need to work out the loop suppression to get an idea of how much input beam motion was being generated.  Unfortunately we don't have a true out-of-loop sensor of alignment before the IMC.  We may try this test again with the loops off, or the gain reduced, or calibrate the motion using the IMC WFS dc channels with the IMC unlocked.  Recall that Keita has commissioned the DOF5 YAW loop to suppress the intensity noise around 300Hz.

The two attached plots show the coherence between the excitation channel (PIT or YAW) and various interferometer channels.  The coupling from YAW is much worse: at 200Hz, an excitation 10x larger than normal noise (we think) generates coherence around 0.6, so the quiescent level could generate a few percent of the DARM noise.  Looking at these plots has us pretty stumped.  How does input beam jitter couple into DARM?  If it's jitter --> intensity noise, why isn't it coherent with something like REFL_A_LF or POP_A_LF (not shown, but zero)? 

The third plot is a comparison of various channels with the excitation on (red) and off (blue).  Note the DCPD sum in the upper right corner.  Will have to think more about this after getting some slpee.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 08:43, Tuesday 08 September 2015 (21290)

Transfer function please.

evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - 12:04, Tuesday 08 September 2015 (21294)

TFs of the yaw measurement attached.

If the WFS A error signal accurately represents the quiescent yaw jitter into the IMC, the orange TF suggests that this jitter contributes the DCPD sum at a level of 3×10−8 mA/Hz1/2 at 100 Hz, which is about a factor of 6 below the total noise.

Images attached to this comment
evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - 02:02, Friday 11 September 2015 (21393)

Using this measured WFS A yaw → DCPD sum TF, I projected the noise from WFS A onto the DARM spectrum (using data from 2015-08-27). Since the coupling TF was taken during a completely different lock stretch than the noises, this should be taken with a grain of salt. However, it gives us an idea of how significant the jitter is above 100 Hz. (Pitch has not yet been included.)

Non-image files attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 11:33, Friday 11 September 2015 (21402)

PIT coupling per beam rotation angle is a factor of 7.5 smaller than YAW:

https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=21212

paul.fulda@LIGO.ORG - 07:38, Monday 14 September 2015 (21496)

Re: "How does beam jitter couple to DARM?" : jitter can couple to DARM via misalignments of core optics (see https://www.osapublishing.org/ao/abstract.cfm?uri=ao-37-28-6734).

If this is the dominant coupling mechanism, you should see some coherence between a DARM BLRMS channel where this jitter noise is the dominant noise (you may need to drive jitter with white noise for this) and some of the main IFO WFS channels. 

gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - 09:00, Monday 14 September 2015 (21498)

The BLRMS in the input beam jitter region (300-400 Hz) is remarkably stable over each lock (see my entry here), so there seems to be no clear correlation with residual motion of any IFO angular control.

paul.fulda@LIGO.ORG - 13:27, Monday 14 September 2015 (21509)

Thanks for the link to that post, I hadn't seen it. It may still be possible though that there's some alignment offset in the main IFO that couples the jitter to DARM (i.e. a DC offset that is large compared to residual motion – perhaps caused by mode mismatch + miscentering on a WFS). This could be checked by putting offsets on WFS channels and seeing how the coupling changes. 

LHO General
patrick.thomas@LIGO.ORG - posted 04:07, Saturday 05 September 2015 - last comment - 04:14, Saturday 05 September 2015(21233)
Ops Owl Mid Shift Summary
Took over from Nutsinee. Dan, Kiwamu and Darkhan also here.

07:15 UTC Lock loss. SUS OMC SW WD tripped. Possible earthquake.
07:21 UTC Touched up SUS ETMX pitch for locking on green. X arm green power remaining around .8
07:26 UTC Requested INIT, DOWN then NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE. Did not help.
07:39 UTC Dan suggested adjusting TMS alignment. This brought the X arm green power over 1. Guardian moved on.
07:44 UTC Reloaded TJ's script on video5 per his earlier request.
DRMI alignment looks bad, misaligned SRM to lock on PRMI, did not help
07:50 UTC Started initial alignment per Dan's suggestion
08:35 UTC Darkhan left. Kiwamu and Dan still here.
08:38 UTC Got to and stopped at DC_READOUT_TRANSITION. Dan modifying guardian to run measurement on OMC.
08:48 UTC Kiwamu left. Just Dan and I here.
08:57 UTC Checked that the PSL cameras are not frozen. Lights are off in the PSL enclosure. Checked mid and end station cameras. All dark, but end X does not move. mid Y still has flickering green lines. Lights are on in the LVEA.
09:03 UTC Dan starting measurement.
09:58 UTC Dan stopping measurement. Investigating possible issues with calibration left over from measurement.
10:52 UTC Observing mode.

More ETMY saturations.
Comments related to this report
daniel.hoak@LIGO.ORG - 04:14, Saturday 05 September 2015 (21235)CAL

When we got back to low noise at 0958 UTC, we noticed the DARM gain was too low by about 30%.  This was probably because we performed the gaurdian steps out of sequence: we increased power on RF DARM to allow for OMC modescans, with the DARM boost on, and then handed of to DC readout.  Performing the RF-->DC handoff with the DARM boost enabled can spoil the coherence of the gain-matching calculation and lead to a value for the OMC-READOUT_ERR_GAIN that is off by tens of percent.  Really we should be doing this calculation with a driven excitation, rather than relying on unsuppressed length fluctuations to provide coherence between AS45_Q and DCPD_SUM.  But we haven't taken the time to code up a tdssine measurement (or tdsresp? something in cdsutils?) in the OMC guardian.

Anyways after some head-scratching we adjusted OMC-READOUT_ERR_GAIN so the height of the 331.9Hz calibration line was the same as it was twelve hours ago.

Displaying reports 57321-57340 of 78019.Go to page Start 2863 2864 2865 2866 2867 2868 2869 2870 2871 End