Displaying reports 62721-62740 of 84550.Go to page Start 3133 3134 3135 3136 3137 3138 3139 3140 3141 End
Reports until 09:58, Sunday 11 October 2015
H1 General (SEI)
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 09:58, Sunday 11 October 2015 - last comment - 10:47, Sunday 11 October 2015(22410)
More on the 45mHz blend change

Jim W. suggestd that we try out the 45mHz blends if we can't lock due to the high microseism. Just before I came on shift, Travis and Sheila switched them over for the X and Y directions on BS, ETMY, EMTX, ITMY, and ITMX. They decided to do this because of the low winds and high microseism.  This seemed to have helped us out quite a bit. Before the change, they struggled getting to lock DRMI, with them switched it only took us a few tries before we were all the way to Nominal Low Noise.

I will be accepting these blend changes in the SDF so we can move into Observing.

Furture operators should change them back if the winds pick up (Sheila says anything above 20 might be too high for these blends), but keep in mind this may drop lock.

Comments related to this report
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - 10:05, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22411)

For future reference the wind had not gusted above 15 mph for about an hour or so before Travis and I changed the blends, and the microseism is at about 0.5 um/sec in the 100-300mHZ BLRMS now.  Before we changed the blends, ITMX optical lever saw about 0.5 urad peak to peak motion, and single arms were not even locking. (ETMX was not moving as much as the ITM) Changing the blends reduced the motion to more like 0.1 urad or even less.  

thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - 10:11, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22413)

Here are SDF shots so operators know what to bring it back to.

Images attached to this comment
jim.warner@LIGO.ORG - 10:47, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22414)

Unfortunately you won't be able to use the SDF system to revert these filters. If you do that you will likely trip the ISI, violently, and it will take longer to recover. You will have open the ST1 BLENDS screen for each ISI and select the appropriate blend from there.

LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 09:25, Sunday 11 October 2015 - last comment - 09:59, Sunday 11 October 2015(22408)
Back to Nominal Low Noise

Back to Nominal Low Noise after being out for ~19hours. LLO is still down so Sheila will run the A2L script and then we will clear up the SDF and move on to Observing.

Note: We are currently running with the 45mHz blends in the X and Y directions for all BSC ISI's to cope with the microseism.

Comments related to this report
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - 09:59, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22409)

Marie's modification of Hang's A2L script ran sucsesfully, and gives us better fits than we had before.  Fits are attached.  Most of them look good, although ETMY is not a great fit I accepted the new gains anyway.  Now that this is working we would like to run this somewhat regularly (about once a day, especially at the begining of lock stretches) for a week or so using single IFO time to track how much our beam spot positions are drifting on the optics.  This is covered under WP5552, although we should discuss tomorow how often we are going to do it.

The scripts can be found in userapps/isc/common/scripts/decoup

to check the decoupling, run ./a2l_min.py

when it is done run ./stop_osc.py to clear up SDF diffs. The whole thing takes about 7 minutes. 

The script will tell you the names of files where the data is stored for the fits (in the directory /rec). 

Images attached to this comment
H1 AOS (DetChar, ISC)
joshua.smith@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:48, Sunday 11 October 2015 - last comment - 12:26, Sunday 11 October 2015(22405)
Scattering arches seen by end-Y ASC QPDs, coupling into DARM

Josh, Andy

Yesterday's hveto page found a very constant rate of 30-40Hz glitches in DARM were vetoed by a population of 10-15Hz glitches in the End-Y QPDs (ASC-Y_TR_{A,B}_{NSUM,YAW,PIT}_OUT_DQ). Fig1 shows the time/freq of the DARM triggers and the ASC-Y triggers that vetoed them, Fig 2 shows the time/freq of all DARM triggers and the ones that got vetoed, and Fig 3 shows how the ranking statistic found all ASC-Y channels to be correlated. A .txt file with the times of vetoed DARM triggers is attached in case folks want to look at other channels around those times. 

Fig 4 shows DARM, figs 5,6 show ASC-Y channels, figs 7,8 show zoomed specgrams to see the frequency. What we see are strong scattering arches around 8 and 16 Hz in all of the End-Y QPD channels, at the same time as similarly shaped fringes in DARM around 48Hz. I think DARM (more sensitive to scatter, potentially, at higher frequencies)  is seeing the 6th overtone of the 8Hz arch (multiple reflections?). The higher overtones are sometimes visible in the QPDs too. 

So...what scatterer/optics is moving too much? We know [1] that f_fringe(t) = 􏰁􏰁􏰁􏰁􏰁abs(2 v_sc(t) / lambda)􏰁. Where v_sc(t) is the time derivative of the position of the scatterer x_sc(t). The time between peaks is about 3.5 seconds, but that is half the period because of the abs() so it's a ~7 second period or 0.14Hz motion of the scatterer. 􏰁􏰁􏰁 

Note: We checked and the beam diverter is closed (H1:SYS-MOTION_Y_BDIV_A_POSITION = 1). 

Note 2: Today's hveto page hasn't finished yet, but no reason to believe this isn't happening still.  

[1] Accadia, T., et al. "Noise from scattered light in Virgo's second science run data." Classical and Quantum Gravity 27.19 (2010): 194011.

Images attached to this report
Non-image files attached to this report
Comments related to this report
joshua.smith@LIGO.ORG - 12:26, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22415)DetChar, ISC, SUS

It probably won't surprise anyone to learn that ETMY top-stage motion correlates pretty well with these fringes. Though, likely lots of things are moving in this way following the high microseism. 

  • The first plot shows that the fringe maxima correspond to roughly where the derivative is max on the ETMY longitudinal motion (judging from channel SUS-ETMY_M0_DAMP_L_IN1_DQ).
  • The second plot shows: f_scatter3 = 3*abs(2*velocity/1.064), where velocity is the time derivative of SUS-ETMY_M0_DAMP_L_IN1_DQ in um/s (assuming that channel is in um.).
  • The third plot, which shows a (not normalized) spectrogram of ASC Y TR NSUM and f_scatter3 after lowpassing the L_IN1 channel to remove its 60Hz (which was making the fringe prediction noisy)
  • Don't know what to make of the need for either the 3rd overtone or the motion being 3x what the channel reads in um. 
Images attached to this comment
LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:07, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22407)
Ops Day Transition
  • Title: 10/11 DAY Shift: 15:00-23:00UTC (8:00-16:00PDT), all times posted in UTC

  • State of H1: Unlocked since my shift yesterday

  • Outgoing Operator: Travis

  • Quick Summary: Due to high winds and high microseism, the IFO hasn't been locked since my shift yaterday

H1 General
travis.sadecki@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:02, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22406)
OPS Owl shift summary

Title: 10/11 Owl Shift 7:00-15:00 UTC (0:00-8:00 PST).  All times in UTC.

State of H1: Aligning

Shift Summary: Unlocked when I arrived due to high winds.  Unable to complete initial alignment due to many issues I haven't seen before.  Called Sheila and she volunteered to come to the site to help.  When Sheila arrived, she noticed that microseism was high enough that it was giving me troubles locking.  We decided to try Jim's 45 mHz ISI blends, which helped enough to get further than I previously had.  However, the BS ISI stage 2 tripped after a few minutes.

Incoming operator: TJ

Activity log:

8:23 cleared H1IOPASC0 timing error

H1 General
travis.sadecki@LIGO.ORG - posted 04:18, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22404)
OPS mid-shift update

Working on relocking.  I have been struggling with alignment for a while, but with a little coaching from Sheila, I'm getting there.

H1 General
jeffrey.bartlett@LIGO.ORG - posted 00:05, Sunday 11 October 2015 (22402)
Ops Evening Shift Summary
Activity Log: All Times in UTC (PT)

23:00 (16:00) Take over from TJ
23:15 (16:15) Complete initial alignment. 
23:16 (16:16) Trying to relock
23:37 (16:37) Sheila left the site
00:00 (17:00) Put IFO in down state until wind and seismic calms down.  
02:05 (19:05) Robert S. left the site
02:15 (19:15) Wind below mostly 30 mph - trying to relock
02:35 (19:35) Wind back up, gusts near 40 mph– Cannot get past LOCKING_ALS, will wait for things to settle a bit more
04:18 (21:18) Wind up and down; Seismic still high. Tried relocking with same negative results 
04:43 (21:43) After 12 lockloss at LOCKING_ALS in 12 locking attempts and now seeing wind gusts up to 50+ mph, put the IFO in a DOWN state waiting for Mother Nature to relax  
06:28 (23:28) Wind dropping but still gusty, seismic activity still high. Going to give locking another try
07:00 (00:00) Turn over to Travis


End of Shift Summary:
Title: 10/10/2015, Evening Shift 23:00 – 07:00 (16:00 – 00:00) All times in UTC (PT)

Support: Sheila, Elli

Incoming Operator: Travis

Shift Summary: 
- After many tries cannot get past ALS locking state. Wind still over 35 mph with gusts to mid-50s. Will wait until settle down before trying to relock.

- Turned on Jim W. 45 mHz ST1 blends on ITMY while trying to lock (04:18 to 04:43). Saw no difference in the behavior of Y and X during ALS locking. Saw no apparent difference in behavior of the ALS locking with the 45 mHz or Quite_90 ST1 Blends.  
- Wind strong and gusty all shift. Seismic activity also high all shift. The wind is still in the upper 20s and gusty, although it is trending lower. In the past 30 have been able to get to LOCK_DRMI_1F before lockloss. Conditions are improving.  
H1 SEI
jeffrey.bartlett@LIGO.ORG - posted 22:14, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22401)
Try 45 mHz Blends
   Wind had settled a bit (in the teens and 20 mph range) but seismic activity still high. I tried to relock using the 45 mHz Blends, supplied by Jim W, on ITMY. There was no observed difference in the locking/lockloss behavior with the 45 mHz or Quite_90 Blends. I restored the Quite_90 Blends on ITMY.

   Note: While trying to relock this time the wind came back up into the 20s and 30s with several gusts in the 40s, and a couple of gusts over 50 mph. I don't know how good a test of the 45 mHz Blends this was.       
H1 General
jeffrey.bartlett@LIGO.ORG - posted 20:06, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22399)
Ops evening Mid-Shift Summary
   IFO has been unlocked all shift. Wind is still high (gusts in the 50s mph) but calming down. Mostly wind is in mid 20s to low 30s. Seismic activity is still high but also settling down. Tried relocking about 30 minutes ago, with no luck. Still cannot move beyond LOCKING_ALS. As conditions improve will continue to try relocking. 
H1 General
jeffrey.bartlett@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:26, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22398)
Ops Evening shift Transition
Title:  10/10/2015, Evening Shift 23:00 – 07:00 (16:00 – 00:00) All times in UTC (PT)

State of H1: At 23:00 (16:00) Unlocked due to high wind and seismic activity. Running initial alignment. 

Outgoing Operator: TJ

Quick Summary: Wind is high 35mpg with gusts to over 40mph; seismic activity is also high. At shift change, TJ was finishing an initial alignment. Now trying to relock.      
LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:01, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22397)
Ops Day Shift Summery

Title: 10/10 Day Shift 15:00-23:00 UTC (8:00-16:00 PST).  All times in UTC.

State of H1: Unlocked, high winds and high microseism

Shift Summary: Locked until 21:24, haven't been able to relock since due to environment issue.

Incoming operator: Jeff B.

Activity log:

LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 15:15, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22396)
Locking troubles

After the lockloss at 21:24 UTC we haven't been able to lock since.

A few possible environmental factors for these locking woes:

LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:03, Saturday 10 October 2015 - last comment - 14:47, Saturday 10 October 2015(22394)
Out of Observing

Out of Observing so Sheila can run her A2L script while LLO is down (WP#5552)

Comments related to this report
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - 14:47, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22395)

I caused a lockloss at 21:24:57 UTC by entering a wrong matrix element while trying A2L. Apologies, especially after a long lock on a windy day with microseism. 

LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:43, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22393)
Ops Day Mid Shift Report

Observing at ~75Mpc. LLO was up for an hour or so but they are back down. The Hanford Fire Dept had to drive to MY to check a panel that was giving them an alert. Gardening crew is still on site and so is a tour group.

H1 DCS (DCS)
gregory.mendell@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:48, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22392)
The re-calibrated C01 hoft data generated by DCS now exist at CIT

1. The re-calibrated C01 hoft data now exist at CIT.

The results of some quick tests are given below.

The calibration group should decide if it wants to do further testing before we announce that this data is ready for analysis.

Updated missing data and DQ flags are also yet to be inserted into the segment database.

2. The filter files and command line arguments used with gstlal_compute_strain are documented here:

https://wiki.ligo.org/Calibration/GDSCalibrationConfigurations

3. The frame-types, channels names, and DQ flag names are documented in the DCC here:

https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1500502

Specifically, the frame-types are H1_HOFT_C01 and L1_HOFT_C01 and exist for:

H1: 1125969920 == Sep 11 2015 01:25:03 UTC to 1128398848 == Oct 09 2015 04:07:11 UTC

L1: 1126031360 == Sep 11 2015 18:29:03 UTC to 1128398848 == Oct 09 2015 04:07:11 UTC

4. I have update the times C01 exists on the GDS calibration configuration pages, on the O1 Run page, and in the DCC document:

https://wiki.ligo.org/Calibration/GDSCalibrationConfigurations
https://wiki.ligo.org/LSC/JRPComm/ObsRun1#Calibrated_Data_Generation_Plans_and_Status
https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1500502

(And the wiki pages, https://wiki.ligo.org/Calibration/T1500502_Prototype_Info points to the DCC document.)

5. Missing data flags and updated DQ flags are yet to be inserted into the segment database, pending generating these and an OK to proceed.

Here are some important details:

There is no missing H1_HOFT_C01.

There are gaps in L1_HOFT_C01 due to times when there were bad dataValid flags in the raw 64 s L1_R data. These gaps have been reduced down to the times of those raw frames -/+ 16 wings needed for filtering.

The times of the gaps in L1 C01 hoft intersected with L1_DMT-ANALYSIS_READY:1 are:

$ ./compareSegLists.tcl -f1 segs_MISSING_L1_HOFT_C01.txt -f2 segs_L1_DMT-ANALYSIS_READY_1.txt -i -s -T
1127128496 1127128592 96
1127353008 1127353104 96
1127387760 1127387856 96
1127435760 1127435856 96
1127687856 1127687952 96
1128122032 1128122075 43
1128122086 1128122128 42
1128320816 1128320912 96
Total duration = 661 seconds.

The UTC time of raw L1_R data with bad dataValid flags that intersect L1_DMT-ANALYSIS_READY:1 are:

$ ./compareSegLists.tcl -f1 segs_MISSING_L1_HOFT_C01.txt -f2 segs_L1_DMT-ANALYSIS_READY_1.txt -i | awk '{sum = $1 + 16; print sum}' | xargs -l tconvert
Sep 24 2015 11:14:55 UTC
Sep 27 2015 01:36:47 UTC
Sep 27 2015 11:15:59 UTC
Sep 28 2015 00:35:59 UTC
Sep 30 2015 22:37:35 UTC
Oct 05 2015 23:13:51 UTC
Oct 05 2015 23:14:45 UTC
Oct 08 2015 06:26:55 UTC

Most of the above seem associated loss or gain of lock. For example, see the drop out in L1 lock segments near Sep 24 2015 11:14:55 UTC here:

https://ldas-jobs.ligo-la.caltech.edu/~detchar/summary/day/20150924/

Gaps have been filled in when C00 was missing during maintenance days after DMT calibration restarts, but none of these intersect with L1_DMT-ANALYSIS_READY:1

Bottom line: The analysis using the C01 hoft will lose 661 s of L1 ANALYSIS_READY time due to bad dataValid flags.

6. The data is available via NDS2 and using gw_data_find.

Quick test show no issues, e.g., in these example comparison plots between GDS online and DCS offline C01 spectra from Oct 9 (i.e., after Oct. 6 filter updates):

https://ldvw.ligo.caltech.edu/ldvw/view?act=getImg&imgId=99928
https://ldvw.ligo.caltech.edu/ldvw/view?act=getImg&imgId=99929

And for example, calibration factors (which are not applied) now agree too, e.g., for L1:

https://ldvw.ligo.caltech.edu/ldvw/view?act=getImg&imgId=99835
https://ldvw.ligo.caltech.edu/ldvw/view?act=getImg&imgId=99836
https://ldvw.ligo.caltech.edu/ldvw/view?act=getImg&imgId=99839

The calibration group should decide if it wants to do further testing.
 

LHO General
thomas.shaffer@LIGO.ORG - posted 11:18, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22391)
Back to Observing

Back to Observing at ~73Mpc after Robert's work, LLO is still down.

H1 INJ (DetChar, INJ)
christopher.biwer@LIGO.ORG - posted 18:59, Wednesday 07 October 2015 - last comment - 17:24, Tuesday 03 November 2015(22316)
Tested PCALX with new inverse actuation filter
Summary:

We had single-IFO time so I tested the new inverse actuation filter for PCALX. WP5530

Sudarshan and I believe we tracked down the factor of 2 and sign error from the initial PCALX test, see aLog 22160. We wanted to do this test to confirm that.

CBC injections:

The waveform file is: https://daqsvn.ligo-la.caltech.edu/svn/injection/hwinj/Details/Inspiral/H1/coherenttest1from15hz_1126257408.out

The XML parameter file is: https://daqsvn.ligo-la.caltech.edu/svn/injection/hwinj/Details/Inspiral/h1l1coherenttest1from15hz_1126257408.xml.gz

I did three CBC injections. The start times of the injections were: 1128303091.000000000, 1128303224.000000000, and 1128303391.000000000.

The command line to do the injections is:
ezcawrite H1:CAL-INJ_TINJ_TYPE 1
awgstream H1:CAL-PCALX_SWEPT_SINE_EXC 16384 coherenttest1from15hz_1126257408.out 1.0 -d -d >> 20151006_log_pcal.out
awgstream H1:CAL-PCALX_SWEPT_SINE_EXC 16384 coherenttest1from15hz_1126257408.out 1.0 -d -d >> 20151006_log_pcal.out
awgstream H1:CAL-PCALX_SWEPT_SINE_EXC 16384 coherenttest1from15hz_1126257408.out 1.0 -d -d >> 20151006_log_pcal.out

I have attached the log. I had to change the file extension to be posted to the aLog.

DetChar injection:

I injected Jordan's waveform file: https://daqsvn.ligo-la.caltech.edu/svn/injection/hwinj/Details/detchar/detchar_03Oct2015_PCAL.txt

The start time of the injection is: 1128303531.000000000

The command line to do the injections is:
awgstream H1:CAL-PCALX_SWEPT_SINE_EXC 16384 detchar_03Oct2015_PCAL.txt 1.0 -d -d >> 20151006_log_pcal_detchar.out

I have attached the log. I had to change the file extension to be posted to the aLog.
Non-image files attached to this report
Comments related to this report
christopher.buchanan@LIGO.ORG - 20:16, Wednesday 07 October 2015 (22318)DetChar

Chris Buchanan and Thomas Abbott,

Quick follow-up with omega scans. It looks like most of the power is seen in GDS-CALIB_STRAIN about eight seconds after each listed injection time, consistently for each of these three injections. Doesn't look like there are omicron triggers for these times yet, but omega scans for GDS-CALIB_STRAIN are attached.

Full omega scans generated here:
https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~christopher.buchanan/Omega/Oct07_PCALX_Inj1/

https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~christopher.buchanan/Omega/Oct07_PCALX_Inj2/

https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~christopher.buchanan/Omega/Oct07_PCALX_Inj3/

Images attached to this comment
jordan.palamos@LIGO.ORG - 20:52, Wednesday 07 October 2015 (22320)

For complete documentation of the detchar safety injections:

The injections are 12 sine-gaussians, evenly spaced from 30hz to 430hz, 3 seconds apart with a Q of 6. There are three sets with increasing SNR of 25, 50, 100 (intended). However, the SNR is limited by the PCAL acuation range at higher frequencies.

To generate the waveforms I used the script written by Peter Shawhan / Andy located here: https://daqsvn.ligo-la.caltech.edu/websvn/filedetails.php?repname=injection&path=%2Fhwinj%2FDetails%2Fdetchar%2FGenerateSGSequencePCAL.m

I tuned the injections to stay within the PCAL actuation limits referenced in Peter Fritschel's document https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1500484.

The intended time (seconds from start time of injections), freqency, snr, and amplitude (in units of strain) for all injections are pasted below:

 

__time__   __freq__   __SNR__    __AMP__

    0.50       30.0      25.0    5.14e-21

    3.50       38.2      25.0    4.96e-21

    6.50       48.7      25.0    2.15e-21

    9.50       62.0      25.0    2.07e-21

   12.50       79.0      25.0    1.75e-21

   15.50      100.6      25.0    1.78e-21

   18.50      128.2      25.0    1.92e-21

   21.50      163.3      25.0    2.06e-21

   24.50      208.0      25.0    2.39e-21

   27.50      265.0      10.0    1.11e-21

   30.50      337.6       5.0    8.39e-22

   33.50      430.0       5.0    8.51e-22

   36.50       30.0      50.0    1.03e-20

   39.50       38.2      50.0    9.92e-21

   42.50       48.7      50.0    4.31e-21

   45.50       62.0      50.0    4.14e-21

   48.50       79.0      50.0    3.51e-21

   51.50      100.6      50.0    3.55e-21

   54.50      128.2      50.0    3.85e-21

   57.50      163.3      50.0    4.12e-21

   60.50      208.0      50.0    4.77e-21

   63.50      265.0      20.0    2.21e-21

   66.50      337.6      10.0    1.68e-21

   69.50      430.0      10.0     1.7e-21

   72.50       30.0     100.0    2.06e-20

   75.50       38.2     100.0    1.98e-20

   78.50       48.7     100.0    8.62e-21

   81.50       62.0     100.0    8.27e-21

   84.50       79.0     100.0    7.01e-21

   87.50      100.6     100.0     7.1e-21

   90.50      128.2     100.0    7.69e-21

   93.50      163.3     100.0    8.24e-21

   96.50      208.0     100.0    9.54e-21

   99.50      265.0      40.0    4.43e-21

  102.50      337.6      20.0    3.36e-21

  105.50      430.0      20.0     3.4e-21

 

 

christopher.biwer@LIGO.ORG - 12:43, Thursday 08 October 2015 (22344)DetChar, INJ
Here are the SNR of the CBC injections using the daily BBH matching filtering settings:

end time               SNR   chi-squared  newSNR
1128303098.986  20.35  32.86            19.86
1128303231.985  22.62  32.73            22.10
1128303398.985  23.25  21.05            23.25

Expected SNR is 18.4.

Though a recovered SNR of 20 (about 10% percent difference from 18.4) is comparable to some of the SNR measurements when doing injections with CALCS in aLog 21890. Note this is the same waveform injected here except in aLog 21890 it starts from 30Hz. In both cases the matched filtering starts at 30Hz. The last two have a bit higher SNR though.
christopher.biwer@LIGO.ORG - 13:42, Thursday 08 October 2015 (22348)DetChar, INJ
I edited Peter S.'s matlab script to check the sign of these PCAL CBC injections.

Looks like the have the correct sign. See attached plots.

To run code on LHO cluster:
eval '/ligotools/bin/use_ligotools'
matlab -nosplash -nodisplay -r "checksign; exit"

Also in hindsight I should have done a couple CALCS CBC injections just to compare the SNR at the time with the PCAL injections.
Images attached to this comment
Non-image files attached to this comment
jordan.palamos@LIGO.ORG - 17:01, Friday 09 October 2015 (22383)
I checked for overflows using TJ's script with the following command:

gwdetchar-overflow -i H1 -f H1_R -O segments -o overflow --deep  1128303500 1128303651 124

It returns an empty table, so no overflows.

peter.shawhan@LIGO.ORG - 20:27, Saturday 10 October 2015 (22400)
A time-domain check of the recovered strain waveforms is here: https://wiki.ligo.org/Main/HWInjO1CheckSGs.  I found that the sign is correct, the amplitude matches within a few percent at most frequencies, and the phases are generally consistent with having a frequency-independent time delay of 3 or 4 samples (about 0.2 ms).  Details are on that wiki page.
christopher.biwer@LIGO.ORG - 17:24, Tuesday 03 November 2015 (23079)DetChar, INJ
Thomas Abbot, Chris Buchanan, Chris Biwer

I've taken Thomas/Chris' table of recovered omicron triggers for the PCAL detchar injection and calculated the ratio of expected/recovered SNR and added some comments:

Recovered time      time since                 frequency recovered expected  recovered/expected        comments
                               1128303531 (s)          (Hz)           SNR        SNR           SNR
1128303531.5156	0.515599966	         42.56	34.07	25	            1.3628
1128303534.5078	3.5078001022	        61.90	39.41	25	            1.5764
1128303537.5039	6.5039000511	        64.60	28.29	25	            1.1316
1128303540.5039	9.5039000511	        79.79	23.89	25	            0.9556
1128303543.5039	12.5039000511	1978.42	21.38	25           	0.8552                                  suspicious, the frequency is very high
1128303546.502	15.5020000935	 144.05	26.24	25	           1.0496
1128303549.502	18.5020000935	 185.68	26.38	25	           1.0552
1128303552.502	21.5020000935	 229.34	26.29	25	           1.0516
1128303555.501	24.5009999275	 918.23	27.34	25	           1.0936
1128303558.501	27.5009999275	 315.97	11.05	10	           1.105
1128303564.5005	33.5004999638	 451.89	6.76	          5     	1.352
1128303567.5156	36.515599966	        50.12	68.53	50	          1.3706
1128303570.5078	39.5078001022	 61.90	78.23	50	          1.5646
1128303573.5039	42.5039000511	 76.45	52.04	50	          1.0408
1128303576.5039	45.5039000511	 91.09	48.42	50	          0.9684
1128303579.5039	48.5039000511	 116.63	47.73	50	         0.9546
1128303582.502	51.5020000935	 144.05	52.59	50	         1.0518
1128303585.502	54.5020000935	 177.91	52.3	        50	         1.046
1128303588.502	57.5020000935	 261.81	54.8	       50	          1.096
1128303591.501	60.5009999275	 323.36	55.64	50	          1.1128
1128303594.501	63.5009999275	 414.01	19.67	20	          0.9835
1128303597.501	66.5009999275	 390.25	9.55	       10	        0.955
1128303600.5005	69.5004999638	 481.99	9.34	        10	          0.934
1128303603.5156	72.515599966	         48.35	136.81	100	          1.3681
1128303606.5078	75.5078001022	 71.56	156.91	100	         1.5691
1128303609.5039	78.5039000511	 76.45	102.72	100	         1.0272
1128303612.5039	81.5039000511	 138.03	102.85	100	          1.0285
1128303615.5039	84.5039000511	 134.83	95.52	100	         0.9552
1128303618.502	87.5020000935	 1283.14	104.17	100	         1.0417                 frequency seems a bit high
1128303621.502	90.5020000935	 211.97	107.18	100	         1.0718
1128303624.502	93.5020000935	 261.81	104.53	100	         1.0453
1128303627.501	96.5009999275	 323.36	109.66	100	         1.0966
1128303630.501	99.5009999275	 414.01	42.15	40	        1.05375
1128303633.5005	102.5004999638	 959.39	19.11	20	        0.9555                  this last injection had some kind of glitch on it

In most cases looks like the ratio is within 0.1 of 1. On a quick glance I see 10 injections that were not within this range.
Displaying reports 62721-62740 of 84550.Go to page Start 3133 3134 3135 3136 3137 3138 3139 3140 3141 End