We've been seeing the OMC trans camera spot shaking with some lower frequency motion (<100Hz) since the vent. It doesn't seem to be in any IFO signals that we've found so far though, but there's only been a few eyes on this issue (see Jenne's alog79748 for one quick investigation). Looking at the lock from overnight, it seems that the camera was much more stable than previous locks. Yesterday seemed to be some of the worst motion so far (5 day trend and 1 day trend). Trending the OMC QPDs and the OMC ASC I see no difference between the good and the shakey times. (attachment 3). I also would say that it doesn't seem to be affecting our range (attachment 4 and attachment 5). Also nothing seen in other ASC, LSC, or HAM6 CPSs, PEM acc. at HAM6 signals (the other attachments). Next steps would be to take a spectra and start trying to match the frequencies.

Find below range comparison screenshots between a low-range lock from 08/29/2024 after our emergency vent and a high-range lock from 06/17/2024.

Files live in:

 /ligo/gitcommon/NoiseBudget/aligoNB/out/H1/darm_intergal_compare/compare_darm_spectra_OM2_hot_vs_cold_no_sqz.svg
 /ligo/gitcommon/NoiseBudget/aligoNB/out/H1/darm_intergal_compare/compare_darm_range_integrand_OM2_hot_vs_cold_no_sqz.svg
 /ligo/gitcommon/NoiseBudget/aligoNB/out/H1/darm_intergal_compare/compare_cumulative_range_OM2_hot_vs_cold_no_sqz.svg
 /ligo/gitcommon/NoiseBudget/aligoNB/out/H1/darm_intergal_compare/cumulative_range_big_OM2_hot_vs_cold_no_sqz.svg

Plots were done using instructions from alog 76935 (+ help from TJ)

Closes FAMIS26324#, last checked 79642

Corner Station Fans (attachment1)
- All fans are looking normal and within range.

Outbuilding Fans (attachment2)
- All fans are looking normal and within range.

H1 was thermalized and in NLN Cal Meas. for this sweep.

Simulines:

Start: 1408981310

End: 1408982722

/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20240829T154133Z.hdf5

/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20240829T154133Z.hdf5

/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20240829T154133Z.hdf5

/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20240829T154133Z.hdf5

/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20240829T154133Z.hdf5

Broadband:

/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20240829T153209Z.xml

Thu Aug 29 08:10:55 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 10min 51secs

TITLE: 08/29 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 144Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 2mph Gusts, 1mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.10 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is OBSERVING since 23:56 UTC Aug 28 (14 hr lock!)

TITLE: 08/29 Eve Shift: 2300-0800 UTC (1600-0100 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 140Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: TJ
SHIFT SUMMARY: Stayed locked the entire shift, just over 5 hours as of 05:00UTC, calm wind.

• 22:22 UTC lock loss from an Earthquake
• 23:56 UTC Observing, automated aquisition after waiting out the ground motion
  • Running the low range check showed high PRCL coherence at low frequency
  • Elevated low frequency noise below ~50 Hz

LOG:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

I've added a change into the H1_MANAGER Guardian that starts a one hour timer when we reach OMC_WHITENING to allow for violin modes to damp down if needed before moving to NLN. While waiting in OMC_WHITENING, the already existing two hour timer to reach NLN once the locking process starts is ignored as violin modes should be damping without the need for intervention. However, once the one hour timer expires, if ISC_LOCK has still not moved to NLN, H1_MANAGER will move to ASSISTANCE_REQ and initiate a call.

I've also removed some lines in the IFO_NOTIFY Guardian which I had added last year (alog72160) that allowed for an additional time after reaching NLN for ADS to converge and switch to camera servos before calling for help. Since the switch from ADS to cameras now happens before reaching NLN, this code is irrelevant.

All of these changes have been saved and loaded.

The 50mhz boost that I added to the SRM M1-M3 offloading back in the beginning of July was added to PRM today during the commissioning window. I haven't looked at data yet, but we were able to lock with it engaged. FM5 has been added to the safe and observe snaps and to the ISC_DRMI guardian. 

TITLE: 08/28 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Earthquake
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan C
SHIFT SUMMARY: A few lock losses during commissioning time and from an earthquake. We are recovering now and through DRMI.
LOG:

• 1600 Out of Observing for planned commissioning
• 1616 Lock loss
  • Relock consisted of an initial alignment and then back up without issue
• 1802 Back to low noise, commissioning resumes
• 1825 Lock loss
  • I tried to avoid an initial alignment by adjusting SRM and BS during DRMI locking. PRMI and Check_MICH_Fringes would trigger and slow the process down, so I'm not sure I saved any time at all.
• 1953 Observing
• 2222 Lock loss from 6.0 in El Salvador                                                                                                     

TITLE: 08/28 Eve Shift: 2300-0800 UTC (1600-0100 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: TJ
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 11mph Gusts, 9mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.08 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.14 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

• We're relocking following a big earthquake
  • At ENGAGE_ASC
• Wind isn't too bad

Closes FAMIS 28368
 

The processing and plotting code were both giving me some trouble, from not creating the coefficient files in /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/sus/common/scripts/quad/InLockChargeMeasurements/rec_LHO_charge_coeff/, and a bad ITMX measurement from July making shapes not match.

ITMXs measurement is also possibly not good, as it was complaining about its data structure and I was not able to process it.

raise ValueError("no Fr{{Adc,Proc,Sim}}Data structures with the "
ValueError: no Fr{Adc,Proc,Sim}Data structures with the name H1:SUS-ITMX_L3_ESDAMON_DC_OUT_DQ

The charges seem stagnant

Just lost lock from a 6.0 in El Salvador. We will begin relocking as soon as it settles down a bit.

Closes FAMIS 26005 , last checked in alog79586

HAMs:

Things look much calmer now, except for HAMs 7 & 8 still look as they did previously.

BSCs:

Things again are much calmer.

We have a preliminary report for the calibration status of LHO after the vent recovery, based on the measurement taken in LHO:79691. The report can be found here.

Taking a look at the PCALY to (GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_CLEAN) DARM broadband injection, there is an elevated amount of error between 30 and 60Hz. It would be worth considering to update the calibration at the next available opportunity, but it isn't pushing us beyond 10% mag/10deg phase yet. This is also corroborated by the monitoring page here.

N.B. I used pcal to GDS instead of to DELTAL_EXTERNAL because the GDS channel is already calibrated to meters for us. 

I was able to new SRCL and MICH feedforward using the iterative method. Measurements were taken in alog 79693.

The current MICH FF is performing well except for below 30 Hz, so that's where I targeted in my fit. SRCL needed some improvement everywhere.

The new MICH filter is saved and loaded in FM8 and the new SRCL filter is saved and loaded in FM5. They are both labeled with the date '8-27-24'.

To compare how these filters are performing, I would use the templates Oli saved in the above alog, but first save the live trace as a reference to compare against.

I have not yet done the PRCL fit because I want to see how SRCL performs, and maybe redo the PRCL injections before trying the fit.

I ran A2L while we were still thermalizing, might run again later. No change for ETMY but the ITMs had large changes. I've accepted these in SDF, I reverted the tramps that the picture shows I accepted. I didn't notice much of a change in DARM or on the DARM blrms.

         ETMX P
Initial:  3.12
Final:    3.13
Diff:     0.01

         ETMX Y
Initial:  4.79
Final:    4.87
Diff:     0.08

         ETMY P
Initial:  4.48
Final:    4.48
Diff:     0.0

         ETMY Y
Initial:  1.13
Final:    1.13
Diff:     0.0

         ITMX P
Initial:  -1.07
Final:    -0.98
Diff:     0.09

         ITMX Y
Initial:  2.72
Final:    2.87
Diff:     0.15

         ITMY P
Initial:  -0.47
Final:    -0.37
Diff:     0.1

         ITMY Y
Initial:  -2.3
Final:    -2.48
Diff:     -0.18