VACSTAT alarm on BSC3. This is another false alarm due to a sensor glitch.
I have restarted vacstat_ioc.service on cdsioc0 to reset.
I cold booted h1hwsmsr1 after it partially froze so that it could not be logged in to. The hard drive LED was solid on.
Looks like the HWS_ITMY IOC is not running. EDC has 88 disconnected ITMY channels.
Camilla started the HWS IOC, EDC has greened-up.
WP 12159
High voltage disabled. Control Chassis powered off. Cable to chamber disconnected at rack/chassis.
Continuity test of pins:
All pins and shell open to chamber ground.
Next test:
Driver chassis power off, HV off, cable to chamber connected:
The DB25 controls cable was disconnected on the rear of the driver chassis. Cable comes form CER slow controls. Pin 14 has about 100 ohms to chamber ground.
FAMIS26013
No noticeable high frequency noise or other odd peaks. These match up with the plots in last week's report as well.
Wed Oct 23 10:08:19 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 8min 15secs
Gerardo confirmed a good fill curbside.
Here's a few plots looking at the PSL glitches since the start of O4a.
The first plot is similar to Oli's from 80520, blue shows the monitor at all times and orage shows only for times when the IFO was in a low noise state (600 or more) for the whole minute. Since the blue trace includes transients from the locklosses there isn't much of an apparent trend looking at this data without masking out locklosses. From the orange trace you can see that the maximum of the glitches that we have been riding out in low noise has gotten higher recently, after drifting somewhat over the run.
The next plot shows sort of a glitch rate, where I've counted minutes where the FSS fast mon channel goes above 0.6 V as minutes with glitches, and haven't made an attempt to try to count how many glitches are happening each minute.
Aside: Thanks to Erik and Jonathan for helping me understand why Oli has been having a hard time getting data. The reason was that gwpy no longer supports gap handling in the environment, as all the scripts in this duty cycle repo were doing. Now we have to put the gap handling as an argument into gwpy, as shown on line 24 here
Here's the same plots for LLO data, with labels fixed. I'm not sure if the calibration of the fast mon channel is the same at LLO as LHO, but a similar threshold for glitches seems reasonable for identifying glitches.
LLO has generally similar behavoir to our laser, where there are glitches in observing, although they happen at a lower rate.
Quarterly greasing and rotation of VEA AHU fans was completed yesterday. There is a report that one fan is noisier than normal. This is likely due to a failing bearing. Eric is investigating. T. Guidry C. Soike E. Otterman
TITLE: 10/23 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Corrective Maintenance
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
Wind: 3mph Gusts, 1mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.11 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: NPRO swap continues today. A few dust alarms that quickly dissipated, but no other alarms active.
R. Short, J. Oberling
As written in Jenne's alog here, upon finding the spare PSL NPRO SN1661 does not show the glitching we've been seeing with NPRO SN7974 we begsn swapping the PSL NPRO this afternoon. We started by removing NPRO SN7974 and our glitch test setup, then installed NPRO SN1661. We immediately noticed the readbacks in PSL Beckhoff were slightly wrong, meaning we need to adjust the potentiometers on the power supply's internal board that provides these readbacks. With an injection current of ~0.9 A, which gave an output power of ~32 mW, we roughly aligned the beam to our alignment irises that sit between M02 and M03, using M01 to align to the first iris and M02 to align to the second. We did remove the PSL EOM and lens L01 from the beam path; the EOM will be reinstalled once we have a mode matching solution, and L01 will have to be changed to a new lens (the current f=167mm lens installed for L01 gives us an uncomfortably small beam in the area of the EOM crystal). We then set a power meter after M02 and turned up the NPRO injection current until the power meter read ~1.8W; the injection current is 2.144 A. WP13 (a QWP) and WP14 (a HWP) were adjusted to maximize the power read by the power meter (these 2 waveplates serve as polarization clean up for the naturally slightly elliptical polarization of the NPRO beam). We started with ~1.806 W and ended with ~1.814 W. Moving the power meter to the output of the NPRO we measured ~1.86 W, so we're losing roughly 46 mW to wrong polarization. We then calibrated the PSL Beckhoff reading for the NPRO power monitor PD, as well as the channel H1:PSL-PWR_NPRO_OUT_DQ that is also connected to this PD; these now read correctly at ~1.86 W.
We left the NPRO running overnight, so there will be more data collection for looking for glitches, although we also did not see any while working in the PSL enclosure this afternoon. The enclosure environmental controls are also running, but the lights are off.
On deck for tomorrow:
TITLE: 10/22 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Preventive Maintenance
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony (cancelled for maintenance)
SHIFT SUMMARY:
IFO is in NLN and MAINTENANCE. IFO will be DOWN for coming few days (estimated 2-3).
Extremely busy 8 hour maintenance day. The main events were the start of earth moving for the new LHO building, the PSL laser NPRO swap and the CO2Y Laser Swap. Details on all maintenance activities below.
LOG:
Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
16:36 | SAFETY | HAZARD | LVEA | YES | !!!!!LVEA IS LASER HAZARD!!!! | 03:16 |
15:11 | 3IFO | Nichole, Christina | LVEA | YES | 3IFO Audit and Inventory | 17:39 |
15:13 | FAC | Kim | EX | N | Technical Cleaning | 16:54 |
15:13 | FAC | Karen | EY | N | Technical Cleaning | 16:26 |
15:14 | FAC | Nelly | FCES | N | Technical Cleaning | 16:01 |
15:14 | VAC | Gerardo | FCES | N | Clean air compressor run | 16:22 |
15:16 | FAC | Chris, Eric | EX, EY, MX, MY | N | Quarterly grease and rotation of VEA AHU supply lines | 16:03 |
15:17 | TCS | Camilla | LVEA, Mechanical Room | N | CO2Y Laser Swap Check | 15:36 |
15:18 | VAC | Jordan | MY, EY | N | Quarterly turbopump functionality tests | 18:32 |
15:34 | PSL | Ryan S | Optics Lab | Local | Getting spare laser in prep for PSL work | 15:40 |
15:37 | TCS | Camilla | LVEA | YES | CO2Y Laser Swap | 20:22 |
15:52 | PSL | Jason, Ryan S | PSL Room (LVEA) | YES | NPRO Spare Install | 19:12 |
16:04 | FAC | Chris, Eric | Mechanical Rm | N | Quarterly grease and rotation of VEA AHU supply lines | 16:53 |
16:14 | SAF | Safety Committee | LVEA | YES | Safety Committee walkabout | 17:00 |
16:17 | ALS | Keita | EX, EY | YES (will turn on and off) | ALS Cable Work on X/Y PDH | 18:29 |
16:20 | VAC | Janos | MX, EX | YES (EX) | Turbopump maintenance | 19:12 |
16:32 | CDS | Erik | EY Mech Room | N | DC Power Supply Replacement for CNS-II GPS Unit | 17:27 |
16:38 | EE | Fil | LVEA | YES | Biergarten SEI Guralp sensor huddle tests (cabling) | 18:38 |
16:39 | TCS | TJ | LVEA | YES | CO2Y Laser Swap | 20:22 |
16:51 | FAC | Earth Movers | Behind Staging Building | N | Moving the earth | 23:40 |
16:55 | FAC | Karen, Kim | LVEA | YES | Technical Cleaning | 18:15 |
17:01 | SAF | Safety Committee | EX, EY, MX, MY | EX, EY Temp Hazard | Safety Committee Walkabout | 21:15 |
17:40 | 3IFO | Nichole, Christina | MX, MY | N | 3IFO Audit and Inventory | 18:40 |
17:55 | FAC | Chris | Optics Lab | Local | Fume Hood Dissassembly | 18:55 |
20:12 | VAC | Gerardo | FCES | N | Clean air compressor work | 20:37 |
20:13 | 3IFO | Christina, Nichole | MX, MY | N | 3IFO Audit and Inventory | 23:25 |
20:33 | TCS | TJ, Camilla | LVEA | YES | CO2Y Laser Swap | 22:54 |
20:58 | PSL | Ryan S, Jason | LVEA | YES | NPRO Swap | 02:58 |
21:29 | SQZ | Sheila, Vicky | LVEA | YES | SQZ beam profile of beam pump | 22:48 |
22:05 | EE | Fil | LVEA | YES | Biergarten SEI Guralp sensor huddle tests | 01:10 |
TJ, Camilla, Fil.
WP12142, Table layout: T1200007. Swapping because current CO2Y laser was at the end of it's gas life and slowly deteriorating, details in 79560. Prep done in 80679.
Still to do:
TJ, Camilla
Checked the pointing of CO2Y on ITMY using the annular mask and HWS, as in 68391 by injecting ~2W of CO2 after we could see the beam was mostly centered. The IFO beam is ~centered on the origin cross, checked in plot from 80148.
HWS plot is attached as the CO2 was heating and cooling ITMY, we decided that this was well aligned enough not to pico. It's possible these a little more beam in the lower left of the HWS image but the FLIR images yesterday looks the same as before the swap.
WP12150 Replace EY DNS-II GPS receiver power supply
Erik, Fil:
The power supply for the CNS-II GPS receiver was replaced. Erik found that the unit needs to be unplugged for at least 30 seconds or it doesn't initialize correctly.
WP12123 Install python3 alarms system as production
Dave:
The new python3 alarm code, which also uses Twilio for cell texts, was installed as the production code on cdslogin.
WP12145 h1guardian1 reboot
Erik, Jonathan, TJ:
h1guardian1 was rebooted to test the new boot drive which was installed recently. Please see Erik's alog for more details.
WP12151 Correcting missing channels in SDF snap files
Dave:
h1susitmpi's OBSERVE.snap was missing 4 channels. Since its settings were identical to those in safe.snap, OBSERVE.snap was changed to be an identical symlink as safe.snap
lrwxrwxrwx 1 controls advligorts 65 Oct 22 10:11 OBSERVE.snap -> /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/sus/h1/burtfiles/h1susitmpi_safe.snap
lrwxrwxrwx 1 controls advligorts 65 May 2 2016 safe.snap -> /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/sus/h1/burtfiles/h1susitmpi_safe.snap
The HEPI models h1hpietmy, h1hpiham4, h1hpiham5 and h1hpiham6 had safe.snap files were all missing the same 9 channels (see attachment).
These channels were added to the safe.snap files. To test, each models' SDF was transitioned from OBSERVE to safe and back to OBSERVE.
1. Temporary AO/AI connection to end station PDH CM board
Since ALS locking could be a time sink at times, and since going to the end station each time we want to make PDH measurement is a pain, I made the following changes.
CM boards:
Used to be connected to | Is connected to now | |
IN2 of the PDH CM board | Nothing | H1:LSC-[XY]_EXTRA_AO_2 |
OUT2 of the PDH CM board | Nothing | H1:LSC-[XY]_EXTRA_AI_2 |
IN2 of the PLL CM board | IN1 of the PDH CM board (EX, T-ed off), didn't make sense or IMON of the IQ Demod (EY), didn't makessense |
Nothing |
Note that A=1000 sinusoidal excitation in AO results in 115mV RMS (measured at EY).
2. EY: Connecting DC output of the green PDH diode to H1:ALS-Y_REFL_B_LF
H1:ALS-Y_REFL_B_LF, which is supposed to be recording the first PD on Matt's PD interface box inside the ISCTEY, has been recording noise. I connected the DC output of the green PDH diode to the first channel on Matt box with the gain of x1.
(Before this change, the DC output of the green PDH diode was found to be routed to the "TEST" TNC feedthrough inside the enclosure on the same feedthgough panel as the RF output and DB15. There was no connection from "TEST" to anywhere outside the table enclosure.
Also, the first channel of Matt box has a cable called "ISCTEY-ALS-PD6" together with a cable for DC supply, but the other end of that cable was just dangling in air over the NPRO.
I disconnected the PDH diode DC output from the feedthrough panel and rerouted it to the ALS-PD6 cable that is still dangling over the NPRO. Since I didn't have a BNC barrel I used a T. Not too proud but it should be working, see the picture.)
3. EX: Could not find where the DC output of the green PDH diode cable goes.
Like EX, H1:ALS-X_REFL_B_LF have been recording noise. The first channel of Matt box doesn't have any cable connected.
However, unlike EY, the DC output cable of the green PDH diode seems to go to somewhere inside the sea of cables on the cable tray in the direction opposite to the "TEST" feedthrough. The cable was tied to the tray using multiple cable ties together with other cables rather tightly and I couldn't find where the other end was. I gave up as I wasn't ready to undo all cable ties on the tray.
[Writing on behalf of Jason and RyanS, who are actively working on the NPRO swap]
TL;DR: We're beginning the process of swapping for a spare NPRO.
This morning, Jason and Ryan went into the PSL enclosure and mounted a spare NPRO (they will remind me of which serial number later) on the PSL table, and cabled it up. They moved the PD that serves H1:PSL-PWR_NPRO_OUT_DQ over near that spare NPRO and used a spare pickoff mirror to direct a small amount of power from the spare NPRO to the PD. This test was to see if the spare NPRO exhibits glitches in the same way that the original NPRO does. We had decided yesterday at the commissioning meeting that if the spare NPRO, after having sat for ~2 hours, does not exhibit glitching behavior, that we would go ahead with the swap.
In the attachments, blue ndscopes are of the original NPRO, that has been in service for all of O4 to-date. The pink ndscopes are the spare NPRO, in this test setup.
With the original NPRO, you can see a signal when the door to the laser room opens and closes, and also you can see some glitches that are the same order of magnitude as the door. This gives me some confidence that if we do see the door with the spare NPRO, then we should be able to see glitches if they are there. With the spare NPRO and pickoff, the signal on the PD is much lower. However, you can still see when the door opens and closes. We let the laser sit for about 100 minutes, and didn't see any obvious glitching.
Since this spare NPRO is not obviously exhibiting glitching behavior, they are beginning the process of putting in that spare NPRO.
We anticipate that this work will take a few days. We're doing it now since we can't lock during the daytime (due to excess ground motion this week), and LLO is offline for another few days pumping.
Last night, Jason and Ryan put the new NPRO into the main path, as the first step of the swap (alog 80829).
It does see a few occasional glitch-like features (see attachment), but they are (a) much less frequent than the old laser, and (b) no more than 1/2 size. Another factor to consider is that overnight, the PSL environmental controls were left on, so this is a noisier environment than we normally have. Also, no external servos (eg FSS) are engaged.
I've tried to make the y-axis about the same as the orig laser (blue) plots from yesterday, so that it's easier to see that these rare glitches are indeed much smaller than the ones on the old laser.
EDIT: Sheila and I looked at this plot, along with some others that Oli had created a few weeks ago, and it looks like these small 'steps' in the power that are shown here may be of the same type that we had with the previous NPRO. I'm still hopeful that they are smaller and less frequent though. But, these 'steps' may be part of the glitches that we're looking at.
Attached is a picture of the test setup. The spare we are using is SN1661; there is an alog coming at some point regarding the testing of the spares and our rationale for choosing this laser. This closes WP 12153.
J. Kissel WP 12140 I've completed 6 SUS + 4 ISI = 10 of 12 total DOF excitations that I wanted to drive before I ran out of time this morning. Each drive was "successful" in that I was able to get plenty of coherence between the 4 DOFs of ISI drive and SUS response, and some coherence between 6 SUS drive DOFs and ISI response. As expected, the bulk of the time was spent tuning the ISI excitations. I might have time to "finish" the data set and get the last two missing DOFs, but I was at least able to get both directions of LPY to LPY transfer functions, which are definitely juicy enough to get the analysis team started. Measurement environmental/configuration differences of the HAM2 ISI from how they are nominally in observing: - PR3 M1 DAMP local damping loop gains are at -0.2, where they are nominally at -1.0. (The point of the test.) - CPS DIFF is OFF. (needed to do so for maintenance day) - Coil Driver z:p = 1:10 Hz analog low-pass (and digital compensation for it) is OFF. (need to do so to get good SNR on SUS M1 drive without saturating the SUS DACs) Interesting things to call out that are the same as observing: - The PR3 alignment sliders were ON. P = -122 [urad]; Y = 100 [urad]. (Don't *expect* dynamics to change with ON vs. OFF, but we have seen diagonal response change if close an EQ stop. Haven't ever looked, but I wouldn't be surprised of off-diagonal responses change. Also DAC range gets consumed by DC alignment request, which is important for driving transfer functions.) - Corner station sensor correction, informed by the Bier Garten "ITMY" T240 on the ground. (the h1oaf0 computer got booted this morning, so we had to re-request the SEI_CS configuration guardian to be in WINDY. The SEI_ENV guardian had been set to LIGHT_MAINTENANCE.) - PR3 is NOT under any type of ISC global control; neither L, P, or Y. (global ISC feedback for the PRC's LPY DOFs goes to PRM and PR2.) There are too many interesting transfer functions to attach, or even to export in the limited amount of time I have. So -- I leave it to the LSC team that inspired this test to look at the data, and use as needed. The data have been committed to the SVN here: /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Data/ 2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_T_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_V_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_R_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_P_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/Common/Data 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_L_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_T_0p02to50Hz.xml [ran out of time for V] [ran out of time for R] 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_P_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml For the SUS drives templates, I gathered: Typical: - The top mass, M1, OSEM sensors, in the LTVRPY Euler Basis, calibrated into microns or microradians, [um] or [urad]. H1:SUS-PR3_M1_DAMP_?_IN1_DQ [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz] - The top mass, M1, OSEM sensors, in the T1T2T3LFRTSDD OSEM Sensor/Coil Basis, calibrated into microns, [um]. H1:SUS-PR3_M1_OSEMINF_??_OUT_DQ [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz] - The top mass, M1, OSEM coils' requested drive, in the T1T2T3LFRTSD OSEM Sensor/Coil Basis, in raw (18 bit) DAC counts, [ct_M1SUS18bitDAC]. H1:SUS-PR3_M1_MASTER_OUT_??_DQ [Filtered with the 32x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 512 Hz] For this set of templates: - The bottom mass i.e. optic, M3, OSEM sensors, in the LPY Euler Basis, calibrated into microns or microradians, [um] or [urad]. H1:SUS-PR3_M3_WIT_?_DQ [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz] - The bottom mass i.e. optic, M3, optical lever, in PIT YAW Euler Basis, calibrated into mircoradians, [urad]. H1:SUS-PR3_M3_OPLEV_???_OUT_DQ [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz] - The ISI's Stage 1 GS13 inertial sensors, projected to the PR3 suspension point LTVRPY Euler basis, calibrated into nanometers or nanoradians, [nm] or [nrad] H1:ISI-HAM2_SUSPOINT_PR3_EUL_?_DQ [Filtered with the 4x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 1024 Hz] - The ISI's Stage 1 super sensors, in the ISI's Cartesian XYZRXRYRZ basis, calibrated into nanometers or nanoradians, [nm] or [nrad] H1:ISI-HAM2_ISO_*_IN1_DQ [Filtered with the 2x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 2048 Hz] Note: The six M1 OSEM sensors in the Euler Basis are set to be the "A" channels, such that you can reconstruct the transfer function between the M1 Euler Basis to all the other response channels in the physical units stated above. As usual the excitation channel for the given drive DOF (in each template, that's H1:SUS-MC3_M1_TEST_?_EXC) is automatically stored, but these channels are in goofy "Euler Basis (18-bit) DAC counts," so tough to turn into physical units. For the brand new ISI drive templates, I gathered: - The ISI's Stage 1 super sensors, in the ISI's Cartesian XYZRXRYRZ basis, calibrated into nanometers or nanoradians, [nm] or [nrad] H1:ISI-HAM2_ISO_*_IN1_DQ [Filtered with the 2x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 2048 Hz] - The ISI's Stage 1 GS13 inertial sensors, projected to the PR3 suspension point LTVRPY Euler basis, calibrated into nanometers or nanoradians, [nm] or [nrad] H1:ISI-HAM2_SUSPOINT_PR3_EUL_?_DQ [Filtered with the 4x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 1024 Hz] - The top mass, M1, OSEM sensors, in the LTVRPY Euler Basis, calibrated into microns or microradians, [um] or [urad]. H1:SUS-PR3_M1_DAMP_?_IN1_DQ [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz] - The bottom mass i.e. optic, M3, OSEM sensors, in the LPY Euler Basis, calibrated into microns or microradians, [um] or [urad]. H1:SUS-PR3_M3_WIT_?_DQ [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz] - The bottom mass i.e. optic, M3, optical lever, in PIT YAW Euler Basis, calibrated into mircoradians, [urad]. H1:SUS-PR3_M3_OPLEV_???_OUT_DQ [Filtered with the 64x filter, then downsampled to to fs = 256 Hz] - The ISI's Stage 1 actuators' requested drive, in the H1H2H3V1V2V3 ISI actuator basis, in raw (16-bit) DAC counts, [ct_ISIST116bitDAC]. H1:ISI-HAM2_OUTF_??_OUT [Didn't realize in time that there are DQ channels H1:ISI-HAM2_MASTER_??_DRIVE_DQ stored at fs = 2048 Hz, or I would have used those.] Note: Here, I set the number of "A" channels to twelve, such that both the ISI's Cartesian basis and the PR3 Suspoint basis versions of the GS13s can be used as the transfer function reference channel.
OK ok ok. I couldn't resist and it didn't take that long. I attach the unit-full transfer functions between the ISI Sus. Point Drive DOFs (L, P, Y, and T) and the Top Mass SUS M1 OSEMs response in L, P, Y. It's.... a complicated collection of TFs; and this isn't all of them that are relevant! Just to make the point that Dan DeBra taught Brian Lantz, who taught me, and we're passing down to Edgard Bonilla: *every* DOF matters; the one you ignore is the one that will bite you. The transverse, T, DOF drive data set demonstrates this point. None of these transverse to LPY couplings nominally exist if we just consider first principles equations of rigid-body motion of an ideal suspension. But alas, the on-resonance coupling from T to L, P, Y ranges from 0.1 ... to 50 [m/m] or [rad/m]. I may need to drive the ISI with an entirely different color of excitation to resolve these transfer functions above 5 Hz, where it's perhaps most interesting for DARM, but this is a good start. The ISI drive templates have been re-committed to the repo with the calibrations of each channel in place. (It was really easy: just multiplying each channel by the appropriate 1e-9 [m/nm] or 1e-6 [m/um] in translation, and similar 1e-9 [rad/nrad] or 1e-6 [rad/urad].)
Thank Jeff!
You were right - this looks much more interesting than I had hoped. We'll run the scripts for the SUS to SUS TFs and put them up here, too.
Transverse to Pitch at 50 rad/m on resonance. Maybe "only" 10 when you turn up the damping to nominal? Ug.
I've also taken a look at how much the ISI moves when Jeff drives the BOSEMs on the top stage of PR3. The answer is "not very much". I've attached two plots, one for the top mass Yaw drive and the other for the top mass length drive. note - The ISI reponses need to be divided by 1000 - they are showing nm or nrad/drive, while the SUS is showing microns or microradians/drive.
So - the back reaction of the osem drives can be safely ignored for PR3, and probably all the triples, as expected. (maybe not for the TMs, not that it matters right now).
It raises 2 questions
1. How do I divide a line by 1000 in a dtt plot? (I feel so old)
2. Why does the green line (SUSPoint) look so much noiser that the cart-basis blend signals? I would expect these to look nearly identical above about 1/2 Hz, because the blend signal is mostly GS-13. The calibrations look right, so why does the TF to the GS-13 signal look so much worse than the TF to the blend output?
These plots are at {SUS_SVN}/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Results/
2024-10-15_length_to_length_plot.pdf
2024-10-15_yaw_to_yaw_plot.pdf
I grabbed the remaining ISI drive degrees of freedom this morning, V and R. The color and strength of the excitation was the same as it was on Oct 15th, where I used the L drive excitation params for V, and the P drive excitation params for R. PR3 damping loops gains were at -0.2 again, Sensor correction is ON, CPS DIFF is OFF. PR3 alignment offsets are ON. For these two data sets, the PR3 top mass coil driver low pass was still ON (unlike the Oct 15th data), but with the damping loop gains at -0.2, there's no danger of saturation at all, and the low pass filter's response is well compensated, so it has no impact on any of the ISI excitation transfer functions to SUS-PR3_M1_DAMP_?_IN1_DQ response channels. It's only really important to have the LP filter OFF when driving the SUS. There was the remnants of an earthquake happening, but the excitations were loud enough that we still got coherence above at least 0.05 Hz. Just for consistency's sake of having a complete data set, I saved the files with virtually the same file name: /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/Common/Data/ 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_L_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_T_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_V_0p02to50Hz.xml # New as of Oct 23 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_R_0p02to50Hz.xml # New as of Oct 23 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_P_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-15_1627_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml
Today I also gathered another round of all six DOFs of ISI excitation, but this time changing the color of the excitation to get more coherence between 1 to 20 Hz -- since this is where the OSEM noise matters the most for the IFO. In the end, the future fitter may have to end up combining the two data sets to get the best estimate of the plant. In the same folder, you'll find /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/Common/Data 2024-10-23_1739_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_L_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-23_1739_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_P_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-23_1739_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_R_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-23_1739_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_T_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-23_1739_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_V_0p02to50Hz.xml 2024-10-23_1739_H1ISIHAM2_ST1_WhiteNoise_PR3SusPoint_Y_0p02to50Hz.xml Happy fitting!
Here is the set of plots generated by {SUSsvn}/Common/MatlabTools/plotHLTS_dtttfs_M1 for the data Jeff collected on Oct 15.
(see above, the data set is in 6 text file with names like 2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_WhiteNoise_L_0p02to50Hz_tf.txt (L, P, Y, etc)
These are funny looking because the damping loops are only running at 1/5 of the normal gain. This gives higher-Q peaks and less OSEM noise coupling. This is done as part of an exercise to run the detector with a combination of real OSEM signals (ie the ones here) PLUS model-based OSEM estimators. I've set the script to show all the cross terms, and these are clearly present. It remains to be seen how much the various cross terms will matter. This is the data we will use to help answer that question.
I've also attached a slimmed-down version of the cross-coupling plots which just shows the coupling to yaw. These are the same plots as above with some of the lines removed so that I can see what is happening to yaw more easily. In each plot the red is the measured cross-coupling from dof-drive to Yaw-response. For reference, these also include the light-blue yaw-to-yaw and the grey dof-to-dof measurements.
These plots and the .mat file are in the SUS SVN at {SUS_SVN}/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Results/
2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1.mat
2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_TFs_lightdamping_yawonly.pdf
2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR4_M1_ALL_TFs_lightdamping.pdf
On a side note, the ISI to ISI TFs are not unity between 0.1 and 1 Hz. I think they should be. This is a drive from the blended input of the control loop (well, several, because it's in the EUL basis) to the signal seen on the GS-13, in the same EUL basis, converted to displacement (so it will roll off below 30 mHz, because the the realtime calibration of the GS-13s in displacement rolls off, and it has a bump at 30 Hz because this is really the complementary sensitivity, and that has a bump because of the servo bump)
But it should be really close to 1 from 0.1 to 3 Hz. The rotational DOFs (right side, red line) look pretty good, but the translations (L, V, T) all show a similar non-unity response. Jim and Brian should discuss. They look similar to each other, so maybe it's a blend which isn't quite complementary?
I've plotted the TFs from the SUSpoint drive to the M1 EUL basis TFs. Note that in the plots, I've adjusted the on-diagonal model plots to be -1 + model. The model is the INERTIAL motion of the top stage, the measured TFs all show the RELATIVE motion between the ISI and top stage. So you want to model Top/ISI - ISI/ISI or -1 + model. This is only true for the on-diagonal TFs.
The code to do this lives in {SUSsvn}/HLTS/Common/MatlabTools/plotHLTS_ISI_dtttfs_M1.m
I've attached a big set of pdfs. The cross couplings look not-so-great. See the last 5 plots for the cross-couplings of dof->Yaw. in particular, L->Y is about the same as Y->Y. (pg 22)
The pdfs and the .mat file have been committed to the SVN at
{SUSsvn}/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Results/
2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_SUSpointDrive.mat
2024-10-15_1627_H1SUSPR3_M1_ALL_TFs_lightdamping_SUSpointDrive.pdf
(Also, see in the previous comments, there was a file which I named ...PR4... this is now corrected to ...PR3... )
After finding that the source of the broad 60 Hz shoulders in L1 appears to be a problem with line subtraction, as reported in LLO alog 773549, we have checked for possible related issues in H1. We have found that unlike in L1, the broad shoulders appear after October 1st instead of after September 17th as can be seen by checking at L1:GDS-CALIB_STRAIN vs L1:GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_NOLINES vs L1:GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_CLEAN at different points in time during these dates, where the shoulders appear in NOLINES and CLEAN. It would also appear like before September 17th the substraction was not ideal either, since there are still some small shoulders
September 17: September 26: October 1st: October 2nd: October 11th:
the current gstlal-calibration was installed at both sites on September 3rd (not September 5th as I've been telling people). At LHO at 17:52 UTC and at LLO at 17:19 UTC.
As in LLO, the shoulders seem to get worse getting closer to September 17th, but before then h(t) values for GDS_CALIB_STRAIN_NOLINES and GDS_CALIB_STRAIN_CLEAN shouldering 60 Hz still appear to be higher than GDS_CALIB_STRAIN, including before and after maintenance on September 3rd. Adding additional plots before and after September 3rd showing this behaviour. Example from June 10th: