Re ISI offloading SUS ISI M0 motion calibration--Looks like it works just fine

As the SUS model is running at 16khz and the ISI is running at 4khz, thought it best to confirm the calibration filters are easily ported to the other model.  The CAL filter running on the ISI (just ITMY for the moment) is just a copy of the SUSpension Cal filter.  Gratefully, the SUS filter bank had a 4k to 16khz filter to process the GS13 data coming from the ISI.

Spectra shows the comparision with solid coherence out to 100hz whereafter it falls off  by a few 100s of hz.  Well that is only true with a 1hz bw.  When I do a .01bw spectra, the coherence starts to falter around 4hz.  The .01hz spectra is attached.

TITLE: 03/10 day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: Nutsinee
SHIFT SUMMARY:'Mainly stayed locked on DRMI all day
LOG:
15:58 Jeff B out to LVEA for parts.
16:23 Jeff out o LVEA
16:26 Christina moving pallets around:into highbay and over to warehouse.
16:52 Christina/Karen finished moving pallets
16:58 Kyle out to EX
17:02 Notification: "ISI_RINGUP: ETMY ISI ringing up"
17:30 Jeff out to LVEA to terminate dust monitor plumbing.
17:40 PEM ISC Timing slave power supply swap starts -Fil
17:45 Robert out to EY
17:48 Fil out of LVEA; Jim rebooting PEM ISC
18:00 Begin initial alignment. Jim working on stability blends due to increasin winds; Sheila restoring a bad safe.snap inhibiting IMC
18:35 Kyle back from EX
 21:25 Jeff B to End Station Compressor rooms
22:15 Jeff back from Ends

[Cao, Aidan]

We have restarted the code on both HWS. We'd like to having them running continously right now. The ITMY HWS is aligned to the Spot 1 position in alog 25905.

I've set the ITMY magnification to a nominal value of 7.5x, per T1400686

Filiberto, Jim, Brynley, Vinny

We powered down the CS-EBAY LSC IO Chassis, and changed the power supply to the timing card to an alternative 12V power supply. It will be left this way while we check if this reduced the 0.5Hz combs in DARM.

WP 5770

Power down h1lsc0 computer to allow modification of timing slave power in I/O chassis.

[Aidan, Cao]

In the online TCS simulation, I updated the absorption coefficients for ITMX, ETMX and ETMY to reflect actual measured values: https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1400685

• H1:TCS-SIM_XARM_POWER_WATTS_PER_INPUT_UNIT 2.606
• H1:TCS-SIM_YARM_POWER_WATTS_PER_INPUT_UNIT 2.378
• ETMY_SURF_ABSORPTION: 253E-9
• ETMX_SURF_ABSORPTION: 160E-9
• ITMX_SURF_ABSORPTION: 520E-9
• H1:TCS-SIM_ITMX_SURF_ABSORPTION 520E-9  # alog 16578caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMX_SURF_ABSORPTION 520E-9  # alog 16578
  caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMY_SURF_ABSORPTION 250E-9
  caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMX_SURF_ABSORPTION 160E-9 # aLOG 19867
  caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMY_SURF_ABSORPTION 253E-9 # aLOG 19835

Additionally, I rescaled the TR_X and TR_Y values to reflect the arm powers, courtesy of some calibration work from Cao.

I have a script (copied below) I've been using to update these values as this allows me to store references to measurements and calibrations.

load_IFO_SIM_COEFFICIENTS.sh

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_XARM_LENGTH 3994.47   # aLOG 20149

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_YARM_LENGTH 3994.47

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_SILICA_REF_INDEX 1.44963  #Suprasil 3001, "Heraeus reports 1.44963 as the index at 1064", GLB email Sept 5, 2014

caput H1:TCS-SIM_XARM_POWER_WATTS_PER_INPUT_UNIT 2.606  # estimate of peak value of 105.9kW in arms (needs ref) between 1141200000 and 1141300000 coupled with measurements of TR

_X

caput H1:TCS-SIM_YARM_POWER_WATTS_PER_INPUT_UNIT 2.378

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_cdsMuxMatrix1_1_1 0.5

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_cdsMuxMatrix1_1_2 0.5

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_cdsMuxMatrix1_2_1 1.0

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_cdsMuxMatrix1_2_2 -1.0

# PRC BLOCK

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_PRC_ITM_R3 24.3931    #T0900043-v11, Table 1

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_PRC_R3_R2 16.1558

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_PRC_R2_RM 16.6037

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_PRC_R3_ROC 36.021  # https://galaxy.ligo.caltech.edu/optics/  PR3-01

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_PRC_R2_ROC -4.543 # https://galaxy.ligo.caltech.edu/optics/ PR2-04

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_PRC_RM_ROC -10.948  # https://galaxy.ligo.caltech.edu/optics/ PRM-04

# SRC BLOCK

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_SRC_ITM_R3 24.1176    #T0900043-v11, Table 1

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_SRC_R3_R2 15.4607

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_SRC_R2_RM 15.726

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_SRC_R3_ROC 36.013  # https://galaxy.ligo.caltech.edu/optics/  SR3-02

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_SRC_R2_ROC -6.424 # https://galaxy.ligo.caltech.edu/optics/ SR2-04

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_SRC_RM_ROC -5.638  # https://galaxy.ligo.caltech.edu/optics/ SRM-05 ????? - CHECK

# SPRING CONSTANTS

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_YARM_PEND_SPR_CNST 1.0  # ??????

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_XARM_PEND_SPR_CNST 1.0  # ??????

# ACOS PRC BLOCK

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_PRC_A_D_OFFSET 0.87

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_PRC_A_D_A0 0.5155940062460905

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_PRC_A_D_A1 -2.0281847857870914

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_PRC_A_D_A2 -3.6292076586482307

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_PRC_A_D_A3 -14.378615634122346

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_PRC_A_D_A4 -69.29856186065047

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_PRC_A_D_A5 -373.821577053177

# ACOS SRC BLOCK

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_SRC_A_D_OFFSET 0.87

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_SRC_A_D_A0 0.5155940062460905

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_SRC_A_D_A1 -2.0281847857870914

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_SRC_A_D_A2 -3.6292076586482307

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_SRC_A_D_A3 -14.378615634122346

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_SRC_A_D_A4 -69.29856186065047

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_SRC_A_D_A5 -373.821577053177

# ACOS YARM BLOCK

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_XARM_SQRT_G_OFFSET 0.87

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_XARM_SQRT_G_A0 0.5155940062460905

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_XARM_SQRT_G_A1 -2.0281847857870914

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_XARM_SQRT_G_A2 -3.6292076586482307

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_XARM_SQRT_G_A3 -14.378615634122346

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_XARM_SQRT_G_A4 -69.29856186065047

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_XARM_SQRT_G_A5 -373.821577053177

# ACOS XARM BLOCK

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_YARM_SQRT_G_OFFSET 0.87

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_YARM_SQRT_G_A0 0.5155940062460905

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_YARM_SQRT_G_A1 -2.0281847857870914

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_YARM_SQRT_G_A2 -3.6292076586482307

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_YARM_SQRT_G_A3 -14.378615634122346

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_YARM_SQRT_G_A4 -69.29856186065047

caput H1:TCS-SIM_IFO_ACOS_YARM_SQRT_G_A5 -373.821577053177

# OPTICS gains

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMX_SUB_DEFOCUS_RH_GAIN -9.0E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMY_SUB_DEFOCUS_RH_GAIN -9.0E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMX_SUB_DEFOCUS_RH_GAIN -9.0E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMY_SUB_DEFOCUS_RH_GAIN -9.0E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMX_SUB_DEFOCUS_CO2_GAIN 62.3E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMY_SUB_DEFOCUS_CO2_GAIN 62.3E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMX_SUB_DEFOCUS_SELF_GAIN 4.8709E-4

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMY_SUB_DEFOCUS_SELF_GAIN 4.8709E-4

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMX_SUB_DEFOCUS_SELF_GAIN 3.8577E-4

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMY_SUB_DEFOCUS_SELF_GAIN 3.8577E-4

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMX_SURF_DEFOCUS_RH_GAIN 1.066E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMY_SURF_DEFOCUS_RH_GAIN 1.066E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMX_SURF_DEFOCUS_RH_GAIN 1.066E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMY_SURF_DEFOCUS_RH_GAIN 1.066E-6

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMX_SURF_DEFOCUS_SELF_GAIN -3.652E-5

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ITMY_SURF_DEFOCUS_SELF_GAIN -3.652E-5

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMX_SURF_DEFOCUS_SELF_GAIN -2.931E-5

caput H1:TCS-SIM_ETMY_SURF_DEFOCUS_SELF_GAIN -2.931E-5

TITLE: 03/10 day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
QUICK SUMMARY: Nothing IFO unlocked; wind speeds <20mph; .1-.3 uSei hovering between 1-2um/s; DIAG_MAIN showing, "OPLEV_SUMS:SR3 sum is low"

[Kiwamu, AIdan, Elli, Cao]

Following from alog 25905, we attempted to realign the beam spot, which is suspected to be the  beam reflected from the HR surface of ITMY onto Hartmann sensor. In order to do this:

    1. Turn off CAGE SERVO, misalign the SR3 to the PITCH and YAW values:

                      PITCH: 1458

                      YAW:    -216.9

     2. Since this beam is most far off from the nominal values in PITCH, we start walking the SR3 PITCH back to the nominal value (563.4. At the nominal value, a beam is centered onto HWS, which we suspected it to be the one refleced from AR surface). The walking is done in in increment:

                 - Decrease the PITCH of SR3 until the beam of interest moves up sightly off the amera active surface.

                 - Start decreasing the PITCH of the upper periscope, then decrease the PITCH of the lower periscope to compensate. This essentially translate the beam upward, bringing the beam of interest back down into the image frame of HWS.

    3. After moving 400 radians in PITCH closer to nominal value, the SLED beam was clipped on the upper periscope mirror (2'' mirror). Initially prior to adjusting the periscope mirror, the beam was at the center. Therefore, a change in 1/sqrt(2) inch helps achieving a change of 400 rad in PITCH. At this point, the green beam in also close to upper edge of  th upper periscope mirror. We then moved the upper periscope upward by 0.7 inch order to accomodate another 400 rad change in PITCH of SR3 to move closer to nominal value.

   4. After reposition upper periscope mirror, we repeated the similar process of walking SR3 back to nominal values and tilting the upper periscope mirror. However, once achieving SR3 PITCH of 880, we started seeing clipping. Using IR viewer to look into the viewport, Kiwamu identified that the the beam is cipping on the top edge of the in vacuum lens (which was also the wong lens installed).  We noticed that the green beam was at the bottom of the upper periscope  mirror. We wondered if there was any separation between SLED beam and the green beam of the case of ITMY HWS, considering the y beams pass through SR2 and a wrong in-vacuum lens. We will need to check with Aidan for some ray-tracing model to investigate this.

   5. Due to this clipping,we could not proceed walking the desired beam onto HWS at SR3 nominal PITCH and YAW values. We then moved the upper periscope downward to initial position, misalign SR3 such that the HR beam candidate was centered onto the HWS and started the ring heater test. Each RH segment were turned on to 2W and we observed the measured spherical power from the HWS, compared to the simulation. This was indeed the first beam that we observed changes when RH is applied. However, looking at image RH_ITMY_9Mar.png , we noticed the trend of change did not follow what we expected from the simuation:

         i. When RH is on,we expected the spherical power to decrease, what observed was the opposite in which the spherical power measured increased with time. 

         ii. The rate of increase in spherical power was much lower than the simulated rate of decrease. Whereas in my recent study of the RH model for X-arm, the magnitude of spherical power simulated is much smaller than measured data. 

         iii. The measurement of spherical power was very noisy.

        For the first two points, I suspected it's either:

         1/  The beam may not be centerd on the test mass but off slightly to one side and what we're getting is an artefact .

         2/ The magnification and the change to a concave lens (the wrong in-vaccuum lens) have not been accounted for correctly, thus resulting in a flip of wavefront, giving rise to increase in spherical power measured.

      Either way, I will have a look at the gradient plot tomorrow and see if we can do some ray tracing modelling to identify where the problem comes from.

State of H1: warm, after TCS work

Activities:

Elli, Kiwamu, Kau, Nutsinee: people working on TCS

Dick: working at PSL racks

Curent Status: high useism and ITM heaing combine to prevent locking

Kiwamu, Stefan

Looking at the cross-power plot in alog 25768, we see a coherent noise floor following the shot noise a factor 3.3 below.

Looking at alog 21167, this seems cosistent with our old firend the excess 45.5 MHz noise in DARM.

Shot noise of 20mA: 8e-8mA/rtHz: a factor of 3.3 below that: 2.4e-8mA/rtHz. This is roughly consistent with the residual coherence seen in alog 21167.

Kiwamu will make an all-O1 plot to nicely resolve that noise. We need to add this noise to the mystery noise projection in alog 25106 (this plot).

LN2 levels for CP3 and CP8 are not under PID control.  

Patrick, Richard, Carlos, Jim, Dave

The new Beckhoff vacuum controls system uses a new channel naming convention. This required several software systems to be reconfigured.

DAQ

When going from the old system to the new system there are three catagories of channel being acquired by the DAQ:

1. old channels which have no equivalent in the new system (qty 97)

2. old channels which have new names in the new system (qty 90)

3. channels which are added by the new system (qty 639)

For catagory 1 I did not do anything, but I most probably should add them back into the DAQ configuration so old data could be accessed.

For catagory 3 other than putting them into the new H0EDCU_VE.ini file there was nothing to be done. They popped into existence yesterday at 6pm.

For catagory 2 some work is needed. To preserve the minute trend lookback back when they had the old name, it was necessary to move their raw minute trend files from the old name to the new name. Patrick provided a file which maps oldname->newname. The process is slightly complicated by the fact that raw minute files reside under 256 directories, named by the CRC8 checksum of the channel's name string (to prevent one monolithic directory). I have included the mapping file and the move script which was ran on h1tw1. I actually did a copy rather than move, so this could be done while the DAQ was still running.

The DAQ change sequence was: Copy minute trend files from oldname to newname, generate the new H0EDCU_VE.ini and H0EDCU_FMCS.ini (Beckhoff reads out the water pressure) then restart DAQ

EPICS GATEWAY

We discovered that there is a channel filter on the epics gateways between the h0ve network and the DAQ/CDS/WS networks. This filtered to the old HVE- naming, we added an additional H0:VAC- rule.

AUTOBURT

Patrick created a new h0veex/autoBurt.req file, this was installed.

MEDM

The VE site overview was changed to match the new EX channel names.

ALARMS

Both the control ALH alarm handler and the cdslogin cell phone texter alarm handers were modified to use the new channel names.

I made a first attempt to investigate the probability of a beam tube tap producing a DARM glitch as a function of tap amplitude. I mounted an accelerometer on the beam tube just inside the single door at Y1-4 +1Y and tapped 2 stiffening rings away.  The only DARM glitch produced was for a tap that saturated the accelerometer (> 1.09 m/s^2). There were a total of ten taps that exceeded this threshold. No glitches were seen for the 70 taps that were under this threshold.  This data supports the contention that the glitch probability is a strong function of tap amplitude. I would like to use a shaker to inject at lower amplitudes for day-scale periods in order to better understand the probability function, but this experiment hasn’t been cleared yet because of fatigue concerns.

One could imagine sudden accelerations of the beam tube, such as thermal expansion stick-slip events, that might be high enough in amplitude and frequency to produce particulate glitches. I investigated the possibility of using microphones to detect such events. I set up a temporary microphone in the beam tube enclosure, running into the CS DAQ. I found, that for the amplitude of taps that produced glitches, I could detect the sound from 1km away (Figure 1). Thus we could monitor the entire beam tube with 8 microphones, based in the stations, but located in the beam tube enclosure just outside the stations.

Attached are 7 day pitch, yaw, and sum trends for all active H1 optical levers.

[Aidan, Kiwamu, Elli, Cao]

SUMMARY:

We prformed a definitive test to confirm the HWSY beam reflected off the HR surface of ITMY. The test arrived at the same conclusion as a previous test reported in alog25617.

The beam reflected from HR surface is the one observed at :

                    SR3 PITCH: 1458 urad

                    SR3 YAW :  -216.9 urad

(The nominal value of SR3 PITCH and YAW at the moment are 563 and -153.9)

METHOD:

         1. We turned of SR3 CAGE SERVO, and initiate excitations of PITCH and YAW of  SR3. These excitations ran for about 5 hours yesterday, between 1141238996 and 1141254773 (gps time)

        This allowed us to scan SR3 and map out all the possible reflected beams onto the HWSY from the TOTAL_PIXEL_VALUE recorded by the HWSY.

Spot	PITCH (urad)	YAW (urad)
1	563.4	-153.9
2	1458	-216.9
3	1332	-1220
4	626.3	613.3

We will use the numbers to refer to each spot in the rest of this report. We are currently centered on beamspot 1

          2. We modify the HWS magnification H1:TCS-ITMY_HWS_MAGNIFICATION from 17.5 to 7.5 according to T1400686

         3. This morning, we moved SR3 alignment to the PITCH and YAW values corresponding to the four spots. At each spot:

                         - Stream the HWS images to make sure the spot was centered

                         -Create a new folder that does not contain reference *.mat file so the HWSY take new reference each time a new spot was centered.

                         -Start HWS and steam data

                         -Initiate 50 mHz, 2urad amplitude excitation on ITMY YAW (H1:SUS-ITMY_M0_OPTICALIGN_Y_EXC)

                         -Observe the changes in the three signals:

                                    1. H1:SUS-ITMY_L3_OPLEV_YAW_OUTPUT (OPLEV Yaw)

                                    2. H1:SUS-ITMY_M0_OPTICALIGN_Y_OUTPUT

                                    3. H1:TCS-ITMY_HWS_PROBE_PRISM_X (Prism X)

                         - Let the excitation run for 5-10 mins, turn off the excitation, let the OPLEV Yaw and Prism X signals to stabilize and epeat the procedure for all the spots.

        4. We then plot the signals H1:TCS-ITMY_HWS_PROBE_PRISM_X and H1:SUS-ITMY_L3_OPLEV_YAW_OUTPUT and compared the magnitude of oscillation in Prism X measured (if any). The one that has the largest 50 MHz signal is the one reflected off the HR surface of ITMY.

OPLEV_PRISMX_P1234.png

shows the four plots of time series of H1:TCS-ITMY_HWS_PROBE_PRISM_X signal compared to H1:SUS-ITMY_L3_OPLEV_YAW_OUTPUT.  From these plots:

                    Beam spots 3 and 4: definitely do not reflected from any surface of ITMY since there is no evidence of 50 mHz oscilliation. They may come from the CP, which fit with the fact that CP is horizontally wedged.  It is also interesting to note that the Prism X values for these two beams decrease contiously during measurement.

                    Beam spots 1 and 2: these two beams come from the 2 surfaces of ITMY.

                                                         The oscillation in X prism measured for beamspot 1 has an amplitude of approximately 0.6±0.2 urad

                                                         The oscillation in X prism measured for beamspot 2 has an amplitude of approximately 1.5±0.2 urad

                                                         Therefore, the magnitude of oscillation in x prism for beamspot 2 is greater. This can be clearly seen if the two time series are plotted together:

                                                        

Time_series_POS0102.png

and it is also supported by the spectrum plot of the two signals with the spectrum of  Prism X of beamspot 2 having a larger peak at 50 mHz (red trace):

Spectrum_POS0102.png

CONCLUSION:

We are currently centered on the wrong beam. We will need to realign such that beamspot 2 is centered on the HWSY. This will involved moving the periscope mirrors . Our previous attempt to walk this beam onto the the HWSY while returning SR3 to nominal values have resulted in some clipping of the beam. So it will be important to identify where the clipping of the beam occurs.