A 0634 this morning the Bonneville Power Administration had power dip. Not sure what was happening yet, but this caused a site wide 1 second outage at LHO. We are in the process of restoring systems.
at 13:33 (06:33) lost power to the site for a couple of seconds. Working on recovering the site.
Other than a few ETM-Y saturation's the first half of the shift has been quiet. IFO has been locked in Observing mode for past 13 hours. Range is 75Mpc.
Environmental conditions have deteriorated somewhat over the past 4 hours. The wind is still light (3-7mph) to gentle (7-12mph) breeze, with some gusts up near 20mph. Microseism is elevated but flat over the past 12 hours. The was a 5.4 mag EQ in Chile (R-Wave arrival ~ 10:53 (03:53)).
Reset timing error on H1SUSETMX at 09:33 (02:33).
Title: 10/20/2015, Owl Shift 07:00 – 15:00 (00:00 – 08:00) All times in UTC (PT) State of H1: At 00:00 (00:00) Locked at NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE, 22.5W, 78Mpc. Outgoing Operator: TJ Quick Summary: Wind is a light to gentle breeze; microseism is slightly elevated. IFO in Observing mode. All appears to be normal.
TITLE: 10/19 [Eve Shift]: 23:00-7:00 UTC (16:00-0:00 PDT), all times posted in UTC
STATE Of H1: Locked. Observing @ ~76 MPc.
SHIFT SUMMARY: Locked and Observing my whole shift, a few saturations here or there, environment calm. I still haven't gotten the chance to reset the ADC error, I'll pass that on to Jeff.
INCOMING OPERATOR: Jeff B.
Log:
I will clear this when we are not in Observing, as we currently are and with double coincidence.
Kyle, Gerardo Today we applied Ultratape against the spool and both sides of the stiffener around the entire periphery, in effect, bagging the inaccessible space between the stiffener ring and the spool. Next, we made a small incision and inserted a 1/4" poly tube to allow us to pump the inside of this "tape bag". The overall seal wasn't very effective due to the lack of access in the area of interest - between the spool and the support gusset which is also the area of the leak - but we were able to achieve < 300 torr inside the tape bag. As expected, the Y-mid pressure responded accordingly. So, at this point we have the leak location narrowed down to approx. 1" x 3" at the overlap of the spool seam weld and stiffener stitch weld (poor fabrication technique!) We have some ideas of how to better access this area which we will need to do before applying epoxy or equivalent to seal the leak.
Laser Status:
SysStat is good
Front End power is 32.13W (should be around 30 W)
Frontend Watch is GREEN
HPO Watch is RED
PMC:
It has been locked 11.0 days, 20.0 hr 27.0 minutes (should be days/weeks)
Reflected power is 1.917Watts and PowerSum = 25.65Watts.
FSS:
It has been locked for 0.0 days 3.0 h and 30.0 min (should be days/weeks)
TPD[V] = 1.512V (min 0.9V)
ISS:
The diffracted power is around 9.125% (should be 5-9%)
Last saturation event was 0.0 days 3.0 hours and 30.0 minutes ago (should be days/weeks)
Things to note:
The usual LRA out of range andVB program online warngins are red on SYSSTAT.adl
O1 days 29, 30, 31
model restarts logged for Sun 18/Oct/2015 No restarts reported
model restarts logged for Sat 17/Oct/2015 No restarts reported
model restarts logged for Fri 16/Oct/2015 No restarts reported
TITLE: 10/19 [DAY Shift]: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PDT), all times posted in UTC STATE Of H1: Locked. Observing @ ~76 MPc. SHIFT SUMMARY: Recovered easily from single lock loss. No apparent corresponding seismic cause. Evan and Sheila took time after recovery to work on measurements at ISCT6. Kyle and Gerardo working on leak checking at mid Y. Joe and Chris working on sealing concrete enclosure over X arm. Kiwamu fixed SDF value for H1:PSL-ISS_SECONDLOOP_SIGNAL. INCOMING OPERATOR: TJ ACTIVITY LOG: 15:02 UTC Jeff B. checking TCS chillers in mechanical building 15:16 UTC Jeff B. back 15:20 UTC Crew heading out to work on X arm concrete enclosure approximately four doors past mid X. 17:10 - 17:17 UTC Stepped out of control room ~18:39 UTC Corey in control room giving tour to two people 19:28 - 19:48 UTC Stepped out of control room 20:11 UTC Kyle getting part out of LVEA 20:21 UTC Kyle back, reports light is on in room immediately after card reader 20:25 Evan and Sheila moving computer from PSL racks to ISTC 6 20:33 UTC Joe driving up X arm to work on beam tube sealing 20:54 UTC Betsy to LVEA to turn on CDS wifi for Evan and Sheila 20:55 UTC Kyle and Gerardo to mid Y for leak checking 21:11 UTC Betsy to LVEA to check on wifi/issue logging into computer 21:18 UTC Betsy back 21:29 UTC Evan and Sheila done ~21:52 UTC Kyle and Gerardo back 22:02 UTC Kyle and Gerardo heading back to mid Y 22:15 UTC Joe back from beam tube enclosure, Chris still there. 22:31 UTC John to mid Y to join Kyle and Gerardo
Attached is the whiteboard plan for tomorrow's Tuesday Maintenance period. Basically, we'll drop the lock first thing in order to misalign ETMs for an SRY characterization study, then roll through some ISS 2nd loop characterization. As shown on the whiteboard, people needing to go to the end stations should do so which the SRY study is going such that End station charge measurements can go on unadultured. After all of this, relocking will resume and commissioners will spend some time on jitter and upconversion studies. See picture for additional scheduled tasks.
Title: 10/19 OWL Shift: 23:00-7:00UTC (16:00-0:00PDT), all times posted in UTC
State of H1: Observation Mode at 75Mpc for the last 2+ hrs
Outgoing Operator: Patrick
Quick Summary: He had one lockloss, but brought it up right after that and has ben locked since. CW inj are on, wind is 15mph or below, useism ~0.1um/s.
Summary--Looks like both HAM2 and the ITMY STSs (STSA & B) have problems with their Y and X dofs respectively. The HAM5 unit is the one solid sensor but I wonder what it will look like if we moved it. Of course it would be that Robert believes the ITMY location in the BierGarten is the ideal place most free from tilt affects. The End sensors look okay but this is not a great way to compare. We need a good unit to move closer for comparison. We still have a unit at quanterra. Further, I'll seek out Robert's review for better scrutiny.
More detail:
Looking at the upper left graph, ASD of the Y dofs: Ham2 Y has elevated noise (WRT other units) from 3 down to 0.4 hz. It is also noisier below 90 mhz, I don't think that is tilt, others would suffer as well I'd think if it was.
At the lower left graph, the Y dof coherences further suggest Ham2 is under performing. The end station units coherence gets above 0.8 below 100mhz and thereafter follows the like coherence between ITMY & Ham5. That seems reasonable.
The middle column of plots for the X dofs suggests that the ITMY unit is not as healthy as the HAM2 or HAM5 around 100 to 300mhz. HAM2 looks much better for the X dof than the Y dof. The Ends X dof behaves much like the Y dof.
For the Z dof in the third column, while nothing jumps out in the spectra, the reduced coherence for the red & blue relative to the green trace suggests the ITMY Z is mildly ill. For the end stations in Z, it looks like tilt is plaguing things below 40mhz but this data is from 2am this morning and was not subject to much wind...So I'm not sure what to suggest there...
Evan and Sheila done Ran a2l script again
Adjusted ETMX in pitch and yaw to lock X arm on green Adjusted PSL diffracted power from 5.8% to 8.5% by changing REFSIGNAL from -2.00 V to -1.98 V. Ran a2l script. Holding off on going to observing mode to allow Sheila and Evan to perform scattering measurements on ISTC6. (WP 5566) Also tracking down SDF diff for H1:PSL-ISS_SECONDLOOP_SIGNAL. The setpoint has F10 ON and it is OFF.
Thank you, Jenne and Patrick for pointing it out. 
Since the PID loop of the ISS is very slow (much slower than 1 Hz), I do not expect significant impact on the interferometer noise performance. Oops.
FM10 should be OFF. Kiwamu had Ed accept the SDF difference when it was ON. It is now OFF. Kiwamu has changed the SDF setpoint back to OFF.
20:54 UTC Betsy to LVEA to turn on CDS wifi for Evan and Sheila 20:55 UTC Kyle and Gerardo to mid Y for leak checking 21:11 UTC Betsy to LVEA to check on wifi/issue logging into computer 21:18 UTC Betsy back 21:29 UTC Evan and Sheila done ~21:52 UTC Kyle and Gerardo back 22:02 UTC Kyle and Gerardo heading back to mid Y
As part of Wednesday's commissioning excercises, we looked at the coupling of input jitter into DARM.
I injected band-limited white noise into IM3 pitch (and then IM3 yaw) until I saw a rise in the noise floor of DARM.
We can use the IM4 QPD as an estimate of the amount of jitter on the interferometer's S port. On the AS port side, we can use the OMC QPDs as an estimate of the AS port jitter, and DCPD sum indicates the amount of S port jitter coupling into DARM.
One thing of note is that the jitter coupling from IM3 to DARM is mostly linear, and more or less flat from 30 to 200 Hz:
The upper limit on IM3 jitter that one can place using the IM4 QPD seems to be weak. At 40 Hz, projecting the quiescent level of the IM4 yaw signal to the DCPD sum suggests a jitter noise of 2×10−7 mA/rtHz, but this is obviously not supported by the (essentially zero) coherence between IM4 yaw and DCPD sum during low-noise lock. Of course, this does not rule out a nonlinear coupling.
As for AS port jitter, the coupling is seen more strongly in OMC QPD B than OMC QPD A.
The test excitation for yaw was 6 ct/Hz1/2 at 100 Hz.
We can propagate this to suspension angle as follows:
This gives 73 prad/Hz1/2 of yaw excitation at 100 Hz, which implies a DCPD coupling of 550 RIN/rad at 100 Hz.
Repeating the same computation for pitch [where the excitation was about 10 ct/Hz1/2 at 100 Hz, and the compliance at 100 Hz is 0.012 rad/(N m)] gives a pitch excitation of 140 prad/Hz1/2, which implies a DCPD coupling of 130 RIN/rad at 100 Hz. So the IM3 yaw coupling into DARM is a factor of 4 or so higher than the IM3 pitch coupling.
These excitations amount to >100 µV/Hz1/2 out of the DAC. Unless the IMs' electronics chains have an outrageous amount of input-referred noise, it seems unlikely that electronics-induced IM jitter is anywhere close to the DARM noise floor. Additionally, the seismically-induced motion of IM3 must be very low: projections of the HAM2 table motion suggest an IM3 suspension point motion of 10 prad/Hz1/2, and this motion will be filtered by the mechanical response of the suspensions before reaching the optics.
Photos of test setup.