Spliting the End Station ISC Models Into Two
Daniel, Jim, Dave:
WP5034. The problem: end station isc models are running long, so their RFM IPC to the corner station do not make it in time. The solution: split the ISC model up into ALS and ISC, with the latter running faster and able to send RFM IPC to the corner in the allocated time (60uS).
Because the h1iscex,ey computers did not have any spare cores (iop, pem, isc, odc, cal) for now we added CAL to PEM to free up a core. Hopefully a better long term solution is to combine isc and odc.
Daniel had done a lot of early legwork getting the models into shape. He hand edited the H1.ipc file to change the source model name for channels moving from ISC to the new ALS models. Daniel also handled the filter module files.
We identified all models which receive IPC channels (including Dolphin) from the new ISC and ALS models. These were also recompiled and restarted.
First thing this morning we moved the new H1.ipc file into place and did a round of make
and make-install on the related models. The testpoint.par file needed editing during the "make install" process due to the model-dcuid change for the isc models.
The rtsystab file was modified for the new model layout in the end station isc front end.
Then all the related models were stopped:
h1lsc, h1asc, h1susetmx, h1susetmy, h1hpietmx, h1hpietmy, h1pemex, h1iscex, h1odcx, h1calex, h1pemey, h1iscey, h1odcy, h1caley
The h1iopiscex and h1iopiscey were restarted. We saw an awgtpman autostart problem with these models.
The end station models were restarted (h1pemex, h1iscex, h1odcx, h1alsex, h1pemey, h1iscey, h1odcy, h1alsey). We had to play around with the safe.snap files for the ISC and ALS models to get them to startup.
The receiving models were restarted (h1lsc, h1asc, h1susetmx, h1susetmy, h1hpietmx, h1hpietmy)
The IPC from the end station ISC models to the LSC are now without any errors. The ALS model still has some IPC to the LSC and this retains its error rate (this model was not substantially sped up).
The DAQ master file was reconfigured for the new model layout, and H1EDCU_DAQ.ini was resynced.
I checked the DAQ data for the PEM and found it was corrupted. This was tracked to the change of the ADC part name in the model when PEM and CAL were combined, and we forgot to remap the bus selector parts attached to the ADC. This was fixed, there is a two hour gap in PEM data.
CDS OVERVIEW MEDM
Dave:
The H1CDS_STATE_WORD_CUSTOM.adl overview MEDM screen was updated:
Pump #8 back on line--FClara had to rewire the db9 end of the Control VOUT.
Pump #7 taken off line to check Accumulators--all good, none with low pressures, #7 back on line.
Added explicit ground to + & - power outputs of power supply. All kinds of wires jiggled, poked, & twisted. No change in the sensor noise.
7:10 Peter King and Richard McCarthy to PSL
8:06 Jim running measurements on ITMx ISI, Jeff K running measurements on HEPI pump servo
8:13 Cris and Karn to LVEA
8:21 Jim done with ITMx
8:31 Betsy to LVEA
8:41 Gerardo to LVEA
8:47 Jodi moving dessicant cabinet from high bay to VPW
8:48 Jim, Hugh, and JeffK to LVEA HEPI spring constant measurements
8:54 Corey to LVEA inventorying enclosures
9:14 Krishna was at EX from 7:30-9:00 working on BRS
9:16 Dave B starting ISC, ASC, and LSC work
9:19 Jodi done
9:40 Corey out of LVEA
9:45 Corey heading to EX and EY for enclosure inventory
9:45 Karen to MY
9:49 Jim, Hugh, and JeffK out of LVEA
9:49 reconnecting HEPI caused a short of pumps, Hugh swapping plugs while down
10:03 Gerardo done
10:03 Betsy done
10:19 Cris to MX
10:36 Betsy to LVEA
10:37 Richard and Peter out of PSL
10:39 Cyrus taking down Framewriter 1
10:40 Elli to EX, EY
10:41 Fil to EX
10:55 Cyrus done
11:03 Corey back from ends, heading to LVEA
11:06 Dave B restarting DAQ
11:13 Karen out of MY
12:05 Betsy and Corey done
13:11 John and Bubba to LVEA
13:33 John and Bubba done
J. Kissel, H. Radkins, J. Warner To help better characterize and model the HEPI system (and to get some gratification out of using M*g = k*x), Hugh, Jim, and I measured the vertical spring rate / spring stiffness of several H1 HEPI systems in the corner station. Here're the results: Chamber Spring Rate (+/- Uncertainty) [N/m] ITMX (BSC1) 7.52e6 (4.22e4) ITMY (BSC3) 7.75e6 (8.09e4) HAM4 7.55e6 (1.19e5) HAM5 8.21e6 (3.23e5) Method: (1) Turn OFF HEPI and ISI feedback control for chamber (brought OFFLINE by guardian) (2) Measure raw V1-V4 IPS signals (waiting for signals to settle enough that the one's digit is all that's changing, and then just caget the H1:HPI-${CHAMBER}_IPSINF_${DOF}_INMONs) (3) Place 10 [kg] load on all four corners of the suspended payload (on the blue cross-beams directly vertical of the vertical actuators on the BSCs, and on the "do not step" cover for the vertical L4C, also directly vertical of the vertical actuators, on the HAMs) (4) Measure raw V1-V4 IPS signals (5) Remove masses (6) Measure raw V1-V4 IPS signals (7) Re-place masses (8) Measure raw V1-V4 IPS signals ... repeat of all four chambers. (9) "Offline" convert raw data to [m] of displacement, x, (a) convert raw IPS signals to [m], with 3.87e-08 [m/ct] (b) take average of V1 - V4 to get Z position (c) create three Z displacement measurement trials, (4) - (2), (6) - (4), and (8) - (6) (10) Calculate spring rate for each trial, k = F / x, where F = m g, with m = 40 [kg] and g = 9.81 [m/s^2]. (11) Take the mean and std / sqrt(3) of three trials, to report spring rate mean and uncertainty on the mean in the above table. Raw notes from data taking (includes load on each spring, which was also measured) /ligo/svncommon/SeiSVN/seismic/HEPI/H1/Common/2015-02-03_HPI_SpringRates.txt Script to process data: /ligo/svncommon/SeiSVN/seismic/HEPI/H1/Common/HEPI_Spring_Rate_20150203.m
WP #5037 Dataviewer has been updated to version 2.9.1.2 for Ubuntu workstations in the control room. This is to fix bugzilla 775, to prevent incorrect channel names from being entered by the user. An incorrect string comparison of entered names to the channel list read from the NDS allowed certain bad channel names to be entered manually, and since data wasn't available for the incorrect channel, dataviewer would substitute different channel data, leading to confusion.
I want to get the HWS working. This morning I installed HWS power cables on ISCTEY and ISCTEX, and plugged in the HWS fiber-optic cable at EY. ETMY power cable was re-wired to match ETMx, as required.
It looks like everything is in place for ETMx HWS. At EY, there are no cables running from the ISTEY feedthrough panel to the TCS rack. I couldn't connect to the HWS computers from the control room, need to find out what state they are in.
(Peter K, Richard M, , Filiberto C, Daniel S)
We noticed that the fast channels corresponding to H1:IMC-PWR_IN and H1:IMC-PWR_EOM were never hooked up. This required installing the PD interface box in the PSL enclosure, running the DAQ cable into the PSL and installing a tee in the photodetector readback. (These channels have previously been hooked up to the EtherCAT system, so they that they are available to the rotation stage.) The EOM channel is currently railed and needs an adjustment of the PD gain.
EPICS updates:
Another update:
I have put a filter in IMC-PWR_IN in order to calibrate the signal into watts. I used the slow readback (i.e. H1:PSL-PERISCOPE_A_DC_POWERMON) as a reference for the calibration such that IMC-PWR_IN matches to the slow one. So now the filter bank looks like this:
These trends were taken while there was someone in the enclosure. New ones will be taken on 02/04.
K. Venkateswara
In response to the problems reported in 16391, I centered the beam-balance in BRS within the nominal range of the angular readout. To do so, I physically moved a small mass on the balance using the bellows mounted on the front face of the vacuum can. After a few tries I was able to center it to within a ~1/3 of the full range. The balance was then damped to low amplitudes and I repositioned the damper.
BRS is now functioning correctly. The first attached plot shows the tilt-subtraction at work. The second shows the coherence between various sensors. The low coherence between the tilt-subtracted super-sensor and BRS RY shows the subtraction is working reasonably well.
Had to boot EX which seems to be a biweekly occurrence. The problem aren't the PLCs or the hardware interface but the communications. The tcioc stops updating with a "No DS mailbox available" error message. This is always preceded by numerous "CAS: UDP recv error". So far, the only way to fix it is to reboot. I did notice that h1ecatx1 runs the Windows firewall whereas the c1 and y1 run a commercial product.
C. Reed, D. Moraru In an effort to ameliorate the daqd crashes on framewriters 0 and 1, we have enabled jumbo frames on the private network links between the framewriters and the QFS gateways under WP 5035. This was the last remaining major difference between our configuration and the LLO DAQ (that we know of). If this doesn't help, we will need to keep looking for a cause for our framewriting woes.
Betsy, Travis
Because of new filters loaded by Rana last week, I wasn't sure there had been an update to the safe.snap file for the ITM and ETMs. Since the IFO was down for Tuesday chaos, we therefore took new ones and committed them to svn. While we were at it, we committed the safe.snaps for the 3 MC SUSes due to my addition of the SDF column to the files yesterday.
WP #5031 Dataviewer has been updated to version 2.9.1.1 for Ubuntu workstations in the control room. This is to fix bugzilla 786, allowing dataviewer to display raw data of multiple signals in a single plot in playback mode.
We then made several attempts to transition off of TR_CARM. As on friday, we are able to get to low CARM offsets, and sit there stably, but haven't been able to turn off TR_CARM yet. We found that we could sit at about 5 pm (TR CARM = -39) stably with just TR_CARM on.
Transition attempts:
At -36 in TR_CARM, engage analog REFLAIR 9 with 40 dB total gain on summing junction and CM board.
At -36. engage REFLAIR9 with and offset of -1.8, tried turning off FM 9 (the complex pole compensation) in TR_CARM. Lost lock at 7:23:45
We've had trouble engaging the DHARD WFS with the opposite sign at the small CARM offsets tonight, which on Friday seemed like it was key to being stable at low offsets.
At one point we also tried transitioning at a farther offset. If I remember correcly, the CARM offset was about -25. This also failed.
J. Kissel, H. Radkins, In further pursuit of HEPI Pump Servo Noise -- found to be coherent with the IFO at low-frequencies (see G1500099, and LHO aLOGs 16386, 16342, and 16239) -- Hugh and I briefly terminated the pressure sensor inputs to the HEPI pump servo (see times in LHO aLOG 16419), in attempt to measure the ADC noise of the PC/104, Athena II, 16-bit ADC (see Diamond System's product website for data sheet and user manual). Sadly, there appears to be no difference between the channels when the sensors are plugged in and when the sensors are terminated. What's confusing about this, is that we know the pressure preamp (D1101839, which adds a gain of 151 [V_diff/V_diff] to each supply and return sensor) and the input instrumentation amplifier inside the servo (pg 2 of D0901559, adding a gain of 2 [V_se / V_diff] for a total of 300 [V_se / V_diff]) are functional and calibrated correctly in the EPICs database. If that weren't true, the DC signal on each sensor's EPICs readback would not match the dial gauges on the system. Further, as mentioned on pg 13 of G1500099, if the pressure sensor's calibration is 0.3 [mV/PSI] (0 to 100 [mV] over a 0 to 300 [PSI] range), typical supply pressure is 70-80 [PSI], then the pre-amplified, instrumentation-amplified, supply pressure signal reaching the Pump Servo ADC should be roughly 6.3-7.2 [V] single-ended, using plenty of the range of the 0-10 [V] ADC range. On the other hand, the return pressure, typically ~5 [PSI], would arrive at the ADC as only 0.45 [V]. Small, but still well above the 10 / 2^16 = 1.5e-4 [V/ct] resolution. So, the DC signals add up and agree with dial gauges, the signals should fit well within the ADC's range well above it's bit resolution, and responds appropriately to little steps in the control pressure. So why don't we get a change in ASD between terminated and connected? We'll continue to investigate tomorrow morning. I attach three things: (1) 2015-02-02_H1HPI_PumpServo_ADCNoiseCharacterization.pdf The pudding. Amplitude spectral densities of the Supply Pressure (H1:HPI-PUMP_L0_BSC2SUP_PRESS), Return Pressure (H1:HPI-PUMP_L0_BSC2RET_PRESS), and the calculated Differential Pressure (H1:HPI-PUMP_L0_DIFF_PRESSURE) for three different times. RED is with the pump servo closed (the current, nominal running state), BLUE is the with the pump servo open, but the sensors still connected, and MAGENTA is with the pump servo open and the sensor inputs terminated. As you can see -- no change between BLUE and MAGENTA. (2) 2015-02-02_HPI_PumpServo_Pics_A.pdf A collection of pictures of the HEPI Pump system, as built at LHO. (3) 2015-02-02_HPI_PumpServo_Pics_B.pdf More pictures of the HEPI Pump system, including pictures of the terminating plug used and how / where it was connected (starting on pg 9). Following the pin out shown in D0901559, where (on pg 1, upper left corner) connectors J1A and J1B are shown to bring in the field Supply and Return pressure signals, I crafted two, dummy, DB9, pressure sensor terminators by connecting the + and - legs (pins 4 and 6) of the differential input with a 100 [ohm] resistive load. All other pins (i.e. the +10 [V] supply voltage to the pressure sensor, and the +/- 15 [V] supply voltage to the pressure sensor preamp) were left open. Again, see pgs 9 and 10 of 2015-02-02_HPI_PumpServo_Pics_B.pdf.
I have entered integration issue 1004 for this https://services.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/integrationissues/show_bug.cgi?id=1004
On Saturday we closed the ISS second loop and dither-locked the OMC, with a single bounce from ITMX. In this state we were able to measure the RIN at the OMC DCPDs with the 2nd loop open and closed.
With the ISS second loop closed, the relative intensity noise at the OMC DCPDs at 100Hz is about 5x10^-8 / rt[Hz]. Above 100Hz, the OMC DCPD RIN is limited by intensity noise; below 100Hz the noise is from something else. See the first plot. The OMC DCPD sum was ~14mA at the time of the measurement, and the shot noise RIN should be 5x10^-9/rt[Hz], well below the measured noise floor.
Compared to Gabriele's measurement from November, the noise with the ISS 2nd loop open is ~10x worse, compare the second plot, upper right, to his third plot, lower right & left. Is the excess noise due to jitter into the IMC? We did not take the time to fiddle with the IMC WFS offsets. Gabriele measured 10^-8 RIN/rt[Hz] at 100Hz with the 2nd loop closed, but we measure 3x10^-8 /rt[Hz], so above 100Hz we may be limited by the gain of the ISS 2nd loop. If this is the case, then improving the RIN out of the IMC could reduce the intensity noise at the AS port.
In the second plot, we compare some signals with the ISS loops open and closed. The second loop suppresses the noise at the OMC DCPDs by about a factor of 100 (lower right plot). Note that in the lower left plot, of the RIN observed by the IM4 trans PD, the ISS first loop only improves the noise at high frequency.
There is a peak in the intensity noise at 700Hz that is not suppressed by the second loop. This also seems to be ~10x worse than what Gabriele measured in November. It's not clear where the peak is coming from, it's seen by the IMC WFS (see third plot), but not by any PEM or IMC length channels that I can find. This peak is broad enough that it may cause trouble with the OMC ASC dither lines. (L1's dither frequencies are around 550-650Hz.)
You can easily get a factor ~10 more noise in transmission of the IMC, if the alignment is not good, see for example log 14301. This is beam jitter converted by the IMC into intensity noise.
The first attachment is a time series of the HAM6 Watchdog, the Fastshutter State, and a GS-13 trace on HAM6. The switch to low Gain is clear on this last trace. This is a 5 day trend and the ~20 minutes needed to get the below .005Hz BW data is comfortably unmolested by the ISI or the fastshutter--the start times of the Spectra calculations begin at the vertical black lines. As for ISI trips and shutter fires--there were none.
The High Gain Spectra period begins at 0800utc on 29 Jan, the Low Gain Spectra begins at 0800utc 1 Feb.
The second attached graph has Horizontal GS13s on HAM6 in High and Low Gain on the upper plot. The Verticals are in the lower plot. High Gain Spectra is Dashed, Low Gain traces are Solid. Also shown is our ADC noise in counts.
One caveat is that the ground motion is different at the two times. The third attachment shows the Cartesian DOFs for the HAM6 GS-13s in the upper two plots and the ground noise in the bottom plot. We've had a ground motion decrease in the microseism frequencies and below during the low gain period. You can see the Low Gain Spectra are at the ADC level below 50mHz. And the 10x signal reduction expected is more like 5x below these frequencies. If this conclusion passes mustard, we'll have to revisit the GS13 triggering delays/levels.
DTT template is /ligo/svncommon/SeiSVN/seismic/Common/MatlabTools/HAM6_GS13_GainNoiseTest.xml
J. Kissel, H. Radkins Which GS13 gain/whitening configurations are the "right" gain configurations? How many times have we asked this? Hugh is trying to settle this once-and-for-all with quantifiable results like the above entry, but I relay the history and current problems with the GS13 gain / whitening switching below. The GS13 Interface Board (D1002706), used for both HAM and BSC ISI GS13s (in D1000067 and D1002432, respectively), has two *independent* switches: one for an analog whitening filter (switching between a flat gain of 1, or a zero:pole filter of 10:50 [Hz] -- a gain of 1 at low-frequency, 5 at high frequency), and one for analog gain (switching between a flat gain of). Thus, there are four possible gain/whitening states for this interface board. See attached visual aide. These two states are compensated for digitally in FMs 4 and 5 of the GS13INF banks, by the difference between the two states (the overall gain of 2 is folded into the calibration filter). FM4 is the switchable gain compensation, FM5 is the switchable compensating de-whitening filter. The front-end code for the HAMs and BSCs is set up that these digital banks control the analog switching. - When FM4 is ON, the gain switch is HI (or a binary output of 1), so the analog gain is 2, and FM4 compensates the gain of 10 difference. - When FM4 is OFF, the gain switch is LO (or a binary output of 0), so the analog gain is 20. - When FM5 is ON, the analog whitening is LO (or a binary output of 0), so there is no whitening, and FM5 compensates the z:p = 50:10 difference. - When FM5 is OFF, the analog whitening is HI (or a binary output of 1), so the whitening is engaged. A long time ago, Brian had performed a design study (see G1000412) that had suggested (on pg 24-25) that "Low Gain Mode [is] good enough to get close to requirements at all [frequencies] above 300 [mHz], tilt[-horizontal] coupling [from vertical GS13 noise turning into RX & RY, which causes X & Y]. [In] High Gain Mode, ADC noise is at least 2x below the sensor noise at all frequencies." where he defines "Low-gain is DC gain of 2, with a zero at 10 [Hz], pole at 50 [Hz]" and "High-gain is fixed gain of 12 (input stage of 6)." Clearly the later statement is now out-of-date with respected to the current revision of D1002706, but the intention is clear -- HI Gain = analog gain ON, analog whitening OFF (FM4 OFF, FM5 ON) LO Gain = analog gain OFF, analog whitening ON (FM4 ON, FM5 OFF) Indeed -- that a "Gain of 10" and "No Whitening" is the "nominal" configuration is now written directly surrounding the circuit in the schematic D1002706. Why? Because - having *no* whitening or additional gain (i.e. FM4 and FM5 ON, or an overall interface response of a flat gain of 2), you'll likely be buried in the ADC noise floor at all relevant frequencies, and - having *both* whitening and additional gain (i.e. FM4 and FM5 OFF, or an overall interface response of low-frequency gain of 20 and high-frequency response of 100, with a z:p pair at 10:50 [Hz]) will likely saturate the ADC. Further, this was solidified in a SEI team summit at the March 2011 meeting, notes were taken (see T1200373) that say the following: " FM4 - Switchable Readout Gain: - Gain of 10 (7) [113] (cancels fixed gain in FM1) - FM4 is ON when analog gain is OFF - FM4 is ON in "low gain" mode (analog x10 gain is OFF) - FM4 is hooked to analog gain via BIO, such that when FM4 is turned OFF, the analog gain is turned ON - Choose for analog switch to happen at zero crossing (a bit you can flag in the foton .txt file) FM5 - Switchable Whitening (for GS13s only): - Filter matches analog whitening (cancels fixed dewhitening in FM1) - FM5 is ON when analog whitening is OFF - FM5 is OFF in "low gain" mode (analog whitening is ON) - FM5 is hooked to analog whitening via BIO, such that when FM5 is turned ON, the analog whitening is turned OFF - Choose for analog switch to happen at zero crossing (a bit you can flag in the foton .txt file) " Seems clear, right? Great. Here's the problem: (1) The front end does not restrict the user from the ADC-noise-swamped state, lets call it "ultra-lo gain mode," of FM4 and FM5 ON (additional analog gain and whitening OFF) or the ADC saturating state, let's call is "ultra-high gain mode," of FM4 and FM5 ON (additional gain and whitening ON). (2) The python command script used to switch between the modes is ${userapps}/isi/common/scripts/sensor_hilo and IT ONLY SWITCHES FM4. This (and the name "hi gain" and "low gain") has confused users who only use this command script into thinking that the difference between the two relevant states is *only* the x10 gain and FM4. This had resulted in chaos and confusion during LHO's period of revolving commissioners, and ingrained a long-standing, almost superstitious, confusion about what "low gain" and "high gain" states mean. Thankfully, I think after 15 discussions on SEI calls, 20 individual-to-individual email chains, and some LLO spy sessions via remote log-in over the past few years, Jim and Hugh have settled on what Brian thought was right answer for GS13s back in 2010: - All* HAMs are in high-gain mode (with FM4 OFF and FM5 ON, i.e. additional analog gain of 10 and no whitening.) - All* BSCs are in high-gain mode ("") Why do I have asterisks next to ALL in both cases that continue to add to the confusion? Because of blasts from lock-acquisition / lock-loss. From experience with DRMI lock-acquisition, LLO has found that ISI BS ST2 GS13s saturate regularly if in (nominal, not ultra) hi-gain mode. If the GS13s are in the (nominal, not ultra) low gain configuration, they don't saturate. As such, for the ISI BS only, we use the nominal lo-gain mode. For experience with the Fast Shutter closing and opening on HAM6, LLO has found that the ISI HAM6 GS13s saturate regularly even in the nominal lo-gain mode. Thus, we've changed the configuration of the HAM6 ISI to the ultra-low gain mode (FM4 and FM5 ON, no additional analog gain or whitening). So here's my suggestions: - we rewrite the python script sensor_hilo to be a FOUR state system instead of a TWO state system, and make sure that FM5 gets toggled as well as FM4. - we use either GUARDIAN or the new SDF system to keep track of these FMs. If the chamber needs to switch gains after lock acquisition or lock loss, it should be controlled by guardian. - we continue to measure the performance of all platforms to find out where we're ADC noise limited in all possible states of the GS13 interface.
"Trust, but verify." Always! Hugh has caught an error in the above description of the GS13 interface's state machine which didn't obey reality. Thankfully, he was able to confirm this with real data from HAM6 -- see LHO aLOG 16606. I've added the following [clarification of / correction to] the above to Hugh's entry, and I repeat it here for completeness: - When FM4 is ON, the gain switch is HI (or a binary output of 1), so the analog gain is 2, and FM4 compensates the gain of 10 difference. - When FM4 is OFF, the gain switch is LO (or a binary output of 0), so the analog gain is 20. - When FM5 is ON, the analog whitening is HI (or a binary output of 1), so the analog whitening is engaged, and FM5 compensates the analog whitening of z:p = 10:50 [Hz] with a de-whitening z:p = 50:10 [Hz] filter. - When FM5 is OFF, the analog whitening is LO (or a binary output of 0), so the analog whitening is is OFF, and no FM5 means no compensation.
Here's a corrected drawing to indicate the state of the FMs in each HI and LO states.
J. Kissel, J. Warner, D. Barker, E. Merilh, TJ Shaffer The one final quiver in our arrow against the sharp HAM3 0.6 [Hz] resonant feature was a computer (as suggested e.g. here), so we did so this morning. Sadly, it did not cure the problem. For now, we continue on, running in the configuration defined by Seb last week, see LHO aLOG 16100, in which the RY blend filters at a higher blend configuration, which is the only thing we can find that seems to help (see LHO aLOG 16001). This has now officially become a low-priority until it begins to quantifiably impact IFO performance. A Recap of all of the things we've tried that DIDN'T make the feature go away: - Restarting the front-end process LHO aLOG 15759 - Full power-down of Front-end and I/O Chassis (This aLOG) - Coil Driver Swap LHO aLOG 16071, LHO aLOG 16061, LHO aLOG 15981 - Changing Suspension Damping LHO aLOG 16013, LHO aLOG 16001 - Changing Isolation Loops LHO aLOG 16001 - Location of Sensor Correction; ISI vs HPI LHO aLOG 15941. LHO aLOG 15933 - Changing from STS2 B to A; In analog LHO aLOG 15811, In digital LHO aLOG 15927, LHO aLOG 15894 - Checking between ADC and sensor correction bank LHO aLOG 15783 - Turning OFF CPS satellite amplifiers, checking jumper settings (oscillators, jumpers, etc.) LHO aLOG 15751 - Adding a large mechanical offset to relieve supposed mechanical rubbing LHO aLOG 15751 - Waiting LHO aLOG 15565
I have entered an integration issue for this at https://services.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/integrationissues/show_bug.cgi?id=1005
Another reboot of h1alsey was needed to fix a wrong ADC channel assignment. If memory serves right, there is a busted ADC channel in EX but then this "fix" was propagated to EY when the new ey model was templated from ex.
Current max CPU times:
The IPC errors from the red transmitted power and the red QPDs have disappeared. We still have the channels H1:ALS-X/Y_ARM with IPC errors. These are sent from the als models. They are no longer needed and can be eliminated.
IPC errors from the corner to the ETM SUS have not changed and are around 10-20 Hz. This is not surprising, since the corner models were not updated.
Noticed that the ODC models in EX/EY run at 32kHz. Since the end stations only run at 16kHz, this is unnecessary.
All safe.snap and filter files are up to date. medm screens updated where needed. All changes in svn. Looks like this change is a success.
Still to do:
Here is the link to the busted iscex ADC channel which prompted the software fix.