Displaying reports 6301-6320 of 83393.Go to page Start 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 End
Reports until 08:47, Thursday 01 August 2024
LHO VE (VE)
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:47, Thursday 01 August 2024 - last comment - 17:53, Thursday 01 August 2024(79396)
Corner Station Dew Point Measurement

Dew point measurement taken this morning read at -43.6 oC.  Measurement taken before any activity inside chambers.  Soft covers were on HAM5 and HAM6, HAM7 is isolated.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - 17:53, Thursday 01 August 2024 (79426)VE

End of the day dew point measurement, at -43.5 oC. 

Images attached to this comment
H1 SYS
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:47, Thursday 01 August 2024 - last comment - 13:28, Wednesday 16 October 2024(79397)
fast shutter slow motion video

A slow motion video of the fast shutter, firing with the high voltage driver in air, is here:  slow motion video

Comments related to this report
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 16:33, Monday 05 August 2024 (79460)

Sheila's original video is ~2sec footage of fast shutter, supposedly at 150 fps according to the file metadata.

Attached is an edited video that shows the 50ms of FS action slowed down by a factor of 10. "SRC TC" is the time elapsed since the start of (Sheila's original) video multiplied by a factor of 10, i.e. 1 sec in SRC TC is actually 100ms. This timestamp is not to be trusted at the lowest digit of sub-second (ms level in reality) because there's some frame interpolation going on due to mismatch between the standard output frame rate of 24FPS VS the source frame rate (150 slowed down to 15 FPS). Anyway, the mirror goes down lower than the closed position right after the initial thrust of the HV fast shutter motion, and even a few bounces after that, before the shutter eventually settles to the permanently closed position.

Also attached is an annotated png file of four frames ("Open", "HV thrust", "Bounce to the bottom" and "Close").

Images attached to this comment
Non-image files attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 13:28, Wednesday 16 October 2024 (80716)

In light of recent failure of the replacement FS at LLO where the mirror broke off due to the hard stops that were set too low, and a comment by Rich (LLO alog 73584) I watched the video of the LHO unit again (see my entry above).

Though LHO video was shot from the side where we cannot see the position of the hard stop, the bobbin might be hitting the stops right after the launch even though the height of the stops looks good to my eyes. See TC~00:00:05:06. And the bobbing oscillates several times though it never hits the stops again.

Does this mean that the magnetic braking is too weak?

LHO VE
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:10, Thursday 01 August 2024 (79395)
Thu CP1 Fill

Thu Aug 01 08:07:40 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 7min 36secs

 

Images attached to this report
H1 General
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - posted 07:35, Thursday 01 August 2024 - last comment - 09:41, Thursday 01 August 2024(79394)
Ops Day Shift Start

TITLE: 08/01 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Corrective Maintenance
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
    Wind: 1mph Gusts, 0mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.05 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Today we'll be closing upu HAM6!

Comments related to this report
ryan.crouch@LIGO.ORG - 09:41, Thursday 01 August 2024 (79398)

Dust monitor 6 needs a restart, dm5 is reporting low battery on the medm which I haven't seen before. I also thought I left dm5 off as it was a noisy pumped dm, I'll take a quick look.

H1 SEI
jim.warner@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:30, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79393)
HAM6 ISI tfs look good, SEI ready for chamber closeout

After transition to laser safe, I unlocked HAM6 ISI, did a small balance adjustment and ran some close out tfs. TFs look okay. I think SEI is ready for doors to go on.

Images attached to this report
H1 General
anthony.sanchez@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:58, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79391)
Wednesday Ops Shift End

TITLE: 07/31 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Corrective Maintenance
SHIFT SUMMARY:
I know that there have been a lot of Laser trasitions done today...
But

The LVEA IS  currently in LASER SAFE.

OFI work has continued all day :

  1. ✅Measure Isolation - new simpler plan suggestion from LLO (cube between SRM and OFI…)  Backup - Need Aux laser in HAM6 as LLO#58791, 58848
    1. If out of spec, adjust TGG crystal location (slots in mount)
  2. ✅ Inspect/deal with beam dumps if not done already
  3. ✅Squeeze beam alignment Check, AS and WFS
  4. ✅Check OFI rejected PD path alog59906 KPT fwd rejected (use WP before OFI)

 

Before closeout 

  1. ✅ Robert in-chamber pictures
  2. ✅Finish testing Fast Shutter, trigger HV
  3. See HAM6 closeout checklist
  4. ✅ Correct OFI osem magnet(s)
  5. ✅ Rebalance  OFI
  6. Reinstall OFI Glass shroud
  7. ✅ Re Check AS and WFS (Not checking WFS)
  8. ✅ Turn on laser for final alignment check 
  9. ✅ Remove all retro reflector, iris and AUX laser parts
  10. Unlock ISI ( Jim is unlocking HAM5 but not HAM6)




LOG:

Start Time System Name Location Lazer_Haz Task Time End
17:22 SAF Laser HAZARD LVEA YES LVEA is Laser HAZARD 20:01
14:32 FAC Eric FTCE No Working on Air Handler 14:52
15:03 FAC Kim & Karen LVEA LASER Hazard Technical Cleaning Kim out first 15:53
15:16 VAC Gerardo LVEA yes Dew Point measurements. 15:26
15:29 OFI Sheila & Betsy LVEA Yes Isolation ratio measurements, Betsy out first 19:30
15:49 PCAL Francisco PCAL Lab Yes PCAL PS45 measurement 16:49
15:55 OFI Camilla, Keita Optics lab & LVEA Yes Getting parts and helping the HAM5,6 crew 19:16
16:10 PEM Robert,  Milly, Carlos End X N Testing PEM equipment 20:01
16:18 FAC Karen Mid Y N Dropping off supplies/ technical cleaning. 17:04
17:04 EE Fil & Richard LVEA Yes Checking on HAM5 17:04
17:47 VAC Gerardo Relay tube Yes Relay tube valve open 17:48
18:52 EPO Amber +10 Ctrl Rm & Overpass n Tour 18:52
19:29 SAF Oli & Ibrihim LVEA Yes LASER Transition to safe. 19:54
20:01 OFI Rahul & Betsy LVEA No SUS OFI work,  Rahul out first 00:19
20:23 VAC Gerardo LVEA No Isolating HAM7 21:03
20:28 Staff Tour Jenne + 15 LVEA No Checking out the HAM5 & 6 Chamber. 21:12
21:29 PCAL Francisco PCAL Lab yes Checking Config 21:39
21:59 SAFE Sheila LVEA Yes LASER HAZARD Transition 22:26
22:06 OFI Camilla LVEA Yes Working on OFI with Sheila 23:45
22:49 SAFE Ryan C. LVEA Yes Laser  Transition 23:19
23:19 VAC Janos HAM8 N Checking Vacuum system 23:59
23:36 SEI Jim HAM5 N Seismic system checks 01:36
23:44 SAF LAZER SAFE LVEA YES THE LVEA IS LASER SAFE :) 22:24
23:48 OFI Richard LVEA N Checking on the Status of OFI crew 00:48

 

H1 General (Laser Safety, Laser Transition)
anthony.sanchez@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:16, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79389)
LVEA LASER SAFE Transition

Ryan Crouch has Transitioned the LVEA to LASER SAFE.

Work Permit 12014

H1 SUS (SUS)
rahul.kumar@LIGO.ORG - posted 15:48, Wednesday 31 July 2024 - last comment - 16:15, Wednesday 31 July 2024(79387)
HAM5 OFI transfer function measurements taken after SD_AOSEM and magnet re-attached

Betsy, Rahul

This afternoon, Betsy adjusted the SD magnet on the OFI and we confirmed that it is sitting correctly in it's place. Next, she inserted the AOSEM and centered it on the magnet (polarity was already checked). We also took this opportunity to take the OLC/offsets/gain for the SD aosem, which is given below,

OLC = 17000, offsets = -8500, Gain = 1.739 (30,000/OLC). This has accepted in the SDF.

The in-air transfer function measurement results are attached below (we took only 3 averages) and they look healthy for all three dof - template at /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OFIS/H1/OFI/SAGM1/Data

We then started attaching the OFI shroud as per D11800103 - the top two, side (+X side) and front shroud has been attached. Mitchell joined us to help with attaching the top and one of the shrouds. There are two/three more panels left to be attached, which will be done once Sheila is done with the beam alignment check.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
rahul.kumar@LIGO.ORG - 16:15, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79388)

I also took out an iris (and post holder) which was sitting in front of the OFI on the ISI table.

H1 General (Laser Safety)
anthony.sanchez@LIGO.ORG - posted 15:08, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79386)
LVEA LASER HAZARD Transition

Sheila has Transitioned the LVEA to LASER Hazard.

Work Permit 12013

H1 ISC (SQZ)
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:59, Wednesday 31 July 2024 - last comment - 16:20, Wednesday 31 July 2024(79379)
OFI Isolation Ratio Measurement

Sheila, Betsy, Keita, Camilla. Continuing from 79373. Measured in 2021 in the lab in 59410.

Betsy and Sheila set up of the power meter in location B of 79373 with the wave-plate rotated such that the beam is visible. Distance between OM1 and retro-mirror is ~350mm, before the fast shutter.

The retro-refection wasn't perfect. Betsy and Sheila found that the HAM5 iris centered on the forward aux laser isn't well centered on the beam retro-reflected from the mirror in HAM6. This made it hard to block the ghost beam (direct reflection, no change in polarization) without also blocking the retro-beam that we want to measure. There is also a bright rejected beam headed to ZM6 which is only there as the waveplate is changing polarization is making some of the beam rejected by the TFP.  They touched the retro mirror to improve it.

They alternated power measurements from position B (the beam that should be isolated by the OFI) and then position A (to measure the power from the laser). Used 10 seconds of statistics mode data for each with the Thorlabs power meter.

Starting measurements at 10:01 PT:

Similar measurements by LLO in 58791 and 2021 from LHO in lab 59410.

Isolation = 10*log10((( 2*Position B)/ Position A)
Isolation = 10*log10 (2*0.2uW  / 7.7mW)
With all the data, using the attached .py file  the three measurements are: [-42.44 -42.62 -43.02]
The mean isolation measured is: -42.69dB This is well within our requirements of -36dB
The temperature control was off, the temperature was 21.6degC plot, nominally while observing we hold this at 25degC. This 3.5degC change corresponds to 1.5kOhm (a 1.1kOhm change at LLO corresponds to a 1dB change LLO58831) so would still be way within our isolation requirements.

AS_C sees this beam, measuring 360uW. It is not centered, -0.4 in Pit and -0.4 Yaw, see attached. When we set up the aux laser it was also off in this direction (-0.6, -0.6) 79300: similar enough.

Betsy and Shieal added a waveplate before the OFI in the AUX path and checked that the forward KTP rejected beam to OFI_B was seen, attached.

In parallel, we turned on the SQZ laser and checked that the SQZ dither lock was stable (0.94mW on OPO_IR_PD) with 75mW of SEED injected. Keita and I opened SQZT7 and adjusted ZM4 and ZM5 to be better centered on the irises. We still didn't have much beam on AS_C but after I further adjusted ZM4 (sdf's not saved), we could see it, see attached.

Betsy is working on replacing the osem magnet I knocked from it's correct position in 79316.

Images attached to this report
Non-image files attached to this report
Comments related to this report
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 14:56, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79385)

Daniel, Sheila, Camilla. We checked that when we turned the OFI TEC control off (before venting) the "room temp" of the chamber is 21.1 deg. WE might not be able to get this low with the TEC on but will plan to run the OFI TEC closer to 22deg than 25deg once back up.

Images attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 16:20, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79390)

Retro reflected beam should have been ~80% of the size of the IFO beam in the OFI. 

According to Sheila the retro mirror was placed ~35cm downstream of OM1 (between OM1 and OM2). Using this number and the measured beam size of the AUX laser in the lab, the beam width of the AUX beam forward (green) and back (blue) propagating beam are plotted in the attached together with the IFO beam size. In this plot, x axis would be zero at OM1.

As a visual aid, I drew the central 18" part of the OFI cage in the HAM5 drawing. On the plot, again as a visual, aid, this 18" range is drawn as two vertical lines. All optical components of OFI should be in this 18" range, FYI they are all mounted on a single 16"-long metal plate (D2000043) though I don't know the position of that plate relative to the cage.

Images attached to this comment
LHO VE (VE)
gerardo.moreno@LIGO.ORG - posted 09:01, Wednesday 31 July 2024 - last comment - 17:13, Wednesday 31 July 2024(79378)
Corner Station Dew Point Measurement

Dew point measurement taken this morning read at -43.9 oC.  Measurement taken before any activity inside chambers.  Soft covers were on HAM5 and HAM6, HAM7 is isolated and a bit pressurized.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
travis.sadecki@LIGO.ORG - 17:13, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79392)

End of the day dew point measurement, at -43.0 oC. 

Images attached to this comment
H1 ISC
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:24, Tuesday 30 July 2024 - last comment - 10:20, Thursday 01 August 2024(79363)
FS Assmembly Reinstalled in OFI

Sheila, Keita, Jennie, Camilla

After practicing with the damaged Fused Silica (FS) wedge, Sheila and I installed the new FS wedge. Labeled E1900361 S/N 07 Run# P20-378, 379. We noticed some dust/fiber on the FS after install (didn't inspect before) so Keita wiped with a clean swab. Photo's after cleaning are first and second attachments.

Yesterday 79351 we found indium foil between part (3) and (5) of the FS assembly D2000037 where the (6) screw contacts. Rodica reccommended we add a new piece of indium foil. Third photo attached.

Keita installed the FS holder ot the assembly and we adjusted roll by eye. We installed the assembly onto the OFI. We reinstalled the beamdump bar (never moved dumps on it but wiped them yesterday) and the baffle bar and baffle. Baffle was installed in the same location, touching the double thick beamdump. We then unlocked the OFI and reinstalled the nominal motion limiter screws.

We then transitioned to laser hazard, the retroflection of the aux beam looked good and we checked that SRM was in it's nominal position. No reason to go to SR2.

The beam through the OFI started very (50mm?) low and was hitting the fast shutter. We then adjusted the roll of the FS wedge assembly to correct for any pitch,  it was hard to make fine adjustments and tightening the screw moved the beam. It was a little off in yaw. Keita has photos of the beam position.

We repeated yesterday's 79344 throughput power measurements with more laser power:

The rejected beam to SQZ goes through ZM6 baffles, and around the middle of the HAM7 GV.

Sheila then headed to SR2 and checked that the beam was centered in pitch and yaw.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 13:26, Tuesday 30 July 2024 (79369)

After taking IR photo, the beam position on the iris close to OM1 seems to be off by about ~2.75mm/2 radius from the center of the iris at 45 degrees angle, i.e. it's too low by ~1mm and to the +X direction in YAW by ~1mm. Look at the 1st picture looking at the iris from the direction of HAM5. There's no parralax though its more focused on visible light than IR.

1mm too low and 1mm to +X don't sound like a big deal, once we have the IFO we should be able to change the beam positions on SRM/OFI and SR2 to get back higher and to the -X if necessary. Remember that the iris was set using the beam we believe to reproduce the alignment before the second crator incident, and we have found that the beam was too high on OM1 using that beam. So the beam being too low  on the iris could be a good thing. But we'll make sure that we can see the beam on ASC-AS_C.

The 2nd picture shows that the diameter of the iris hole is a tiny bit larger than 2.5mm but smaller than 3mm.

Roll adjustment of the fused silica wedge is not that easy at this level (1mm over maybe 2.5m? distance), a tiny rotation results in big change and loosening/tightening the set screw for the rotation seems to change the deflection. As far as we see the beam on ASC-AS_C we won't adjust the FS wedge further as this won't change the isolation/throughput etc. of the OFI.

Images attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 13:29, Tuesday 30 July 2024 (79370)

Serial number of the original FS wedge is 001 according to Rodica.

From what Camilla wrote above, the new one we've just installed is S/N 007.

camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 14:17, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79383)

Not including the first measurement where the laser power was clearly lower, we calculated with attached:

Transmission: 99.82% with stdev 0.72%
Ratio rejected by TFP: 0.188% with stdev 0.004%

The sum of these is 100.01%, which is within the margin of error.

Non-image files attached to this comment
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - 10:20, Thursday 01 August 2024 (79407)EPO

Tagging for EPO.

H1 ISC
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:20, Monday 29 July 2024 - last comment - 14:23, Wednesday 31 July 2024(79344)
OFI KTP Wedge Reinstalled and alignment checked

Sheila, Keita, Betsy, Camilla

New KTP crystal reinstalled, alignment checked,  99.96% transmission and 0.17% rejected. We don't plan to adjust the KPT further and will next remove the FS.
 
Sheila and I measured the distance between KPT holder with the new crystal (79326) and irises in the optics lab (890mm to left far iris and 880mm to right far iris) and then moved it to HAM5.
We checked the OFI suspension was supported using ther dog camps and finger lockers as in 79315 and then placed the KPT assembly with the teflon barrier in place.
There's not much wiggle room but we pushed the KTP assembly as far toward +Y as we could and then tightened it down.
Then let the OFI suspension hang freely.
 
We checked SRM osems were good.
Keita and Sheila could see the retroflected beam on the iris after the aux laser. The beam was also hitting the OM1 iris, maybe 0.5mm off in yaw.

In the last power measurements in 79313 we were loosing 25% through OFI and another 15% from lost through incorrect polarization through the TFP.

Today's measurements:

From the mean of these measurements Sheila and Louis calculated the rejected ratio (power sent to ZM6) is 0.17 ± 0.002%. The transmission through to HAM6 is 99.96 ± 1.45%. The sum of these is 100.13%, which is within the margin off error.

Comments related to this report
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 12:35, Monday 29 July 2024 (79349)

Attached is a .txt version of the .py file Sheila did this calculation in.

Non-image files attached to this comment
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 14:23, Wednesday 31 July 2024 (79384)

We realized that we overestimated the errors here so the transmission through to HAM6 is 99.96 ± 0.84%. Rejected ratio (power sent to ZM6) is 0.17 ± 0.001%. Updated code attached and more recent measurements (with swapped FS) in 79383

Non-image files attached to this comment
H1 ISC (SUS, SYS)
jason.oberling@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:14, Thursday 25 July 2024 - last comment - 10:19, Thursday 01 August 2024(79315)
KTP Wedge Assembly Removed from OFI

C. Compton, S. Dwyer, J. Oberling

This morning we removed the KTP wedge assembly (D2000038) from the OFI and moved it into the OSB Optics Lab.

We began by trying the "transport shims" that are supposed to help secure the OFI.  Unfortunately, these did not work.  The slot in the shims was not wide enough to fit around the OFI Earthquake Stop Posts we were supposed to fit them around, and the shims were too skinny (the posts bottomed out before contacting the shims).  So we had to pivot to Plan B, which was to use dog clamps instead.  This mostly worked, but the OFI still moved around enough that we decided one of us would try to support the OFI while the other turned bolts.  Camilla has some pictures of this and will post as a comment to this alog.  Even still, we managed to almost immediately dislodge one of the OSEM magnets (the one near the lone +X/+Y OSEM) as soon as we started trying to remove the KTP wedge assembly (the magnet is still stuck to the flag on the OFI, will need to have its polarity checked and be put back in place).

We first placed a teflon sheet in between the KTP wedge and the quartz rotator assembly.  Using non-magnetic tools (a titanium hex key that had been bent so it would fit in the space between the KTP and FS wedges, and a beryllium copper one that had been cut short) we attempted to remove the beam dump assembly from the KTP wedge assembly.  Camilla held the OFI and I tried to loosen the bolts holding the beam dump on the KTP wedge.  I say "tried" because the bolts are frozen in place.  We were unable to get them to move, at all.  Pivoting again, we found that the beryllium copper hex key was short enough to fit under the beam dump assembly, so we began loosening the two bolts on the +Y side of the KTP wedge assembly; Camilla had to crawl in the -X door to access the -X bolt while I held the OFI.  This worked until the -X bolt was loose enough that we could no longer fit the hex key under the beam dump assembly.  At this point Sheila used a T-shaped titanium hex key to loosen the -Y bolt on the KTP wedge (the bolt directly under the quartz rotator) while I held the OFI, and then I loosened the +X bolt.  With these 2 bolts loose we were able to lift the KTP wedge assembly enough that Camilla could fit the hex key under the beam dump assembly again.  In this way were able to slowly work the -X bolt free.  With all bolts free I carefully removed the KTP wedge assembly while Sheila held the OFI.  We Ooohh'd and Ahhhh'd at the craters in the KTP wedge for a bit and took some photos (see attached), and Camilla and Sheila grabbed some more pictures of the back side of the FS wedge (more access, and therefore better viewing, with the KTP assembly out of the way).  We also removed the teflon sheet from in front of the quartz rotator.

We ensured all of the non-magnetic tools were separate from other tools in the cleanroom, safely wrapped up the tools we would need as well as the KTP wedge assembly, and moved everything to the optics lab to start prepping for swapping and realigning the KTP wedge assembly (the beam dump assembly will have to be removed in the Optics Lab).  I've attached a few closeup pictures of the KTP; 2 are viewing the front surface and one is viewing the back surface (better view of the coating damage around the craters).  Camilla has several other pictures that she'll attach as a comment to this alog.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 16:02, Thursday 25 July 2024 (79316)

Note on the  D1300098 OFI Transport shims, looking at 3.1.2 and 4.2.1 of E1300056-v4, it appears we were trying to use them incorrectly and should replace the Earthquake Stop Posts with 1/4-20 bolts. We could try this next week but it would involve removing another shroud panel to get clearance... 

The first three photos attached show the OFI with the KTP removed, and looking through the FS towards the magnets. Third one shows splatter on FS.

Forth/fifth photos show the dog clamps we used to help support the sled and the osem magnet that got turned over: photo

Images attached to this comment
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - 10:19, Thursday 01 August 2024 (79403)EPO

Tagging for EPO.

H1 ISC
francisco.llamas@LIGO.ORG - posted 22:17, Wednesday 24 July 2024 - last comment - 10:18, Thursday 01 August 2024(79300)
HAM 5 laser alignment day 3

Camilla, Jason, Jenne, Keita, Sheila, Francisco, Naoki

Summary: We are done for AUX laser alignment and power measurement of AUX laser. SQZ beam got to OM1, but we did not do power measurement due to noisy seed dither lock. The following are a mixture of notes between Camilla, Francisco, and Naoki regarding the changes done today:

Aiming for 2 1/4" above EQ stop as 4" between vertical stops and the center of SR2 optic is 5.5mm above center line of EQ stops.

At start of the day, someting had drifted (mainly pitch), re-centered AUX laser on irises.

*Iterating moving auxiliary laser mirror and beamspiltter to center in om1 and retroreflection irises.*

Checking position at SR2:

Swapped the AUX laser steeing mirror to a better optic mount and not woberly perdistal, we are blaming this for our drift.

Jenne also adjusted SRM sliders to yesterdays values.

*Iterating moving auxiliary laser mirror and beamspiltter to center in om1 and retroreflection irises.*

Checking position at SR2:

Moved SRM osems from (175, 140) to (50,190). In pitch moved -125urad from 175 to 50 on osems. In yaw moved +50urad. this was 140 to 190 on osems
Aiming to center the beam on SR2


*Iterating moving auxiliary moving mirror to center in om1 and retroreflection irises.*

Checking position at SR2:

EQ stops are 2 1/2 in away from each other; center is 1 1/4 in from horizontal EQ stop

Will do 100 microrad in -YAW, then check retro in OM1. -100urad in yaw is 190 to 90 on osems

*Iterating moving auxiliary moving mirror to center in om1 and retroreflection irises.*

Checking positions at SR2:

In yaw going +300 urad. This is 90 to 390 on osems.

*Iterating moving auxiliary moving mirror to center in om1 and retroreflection irises.*

Checking positions at SR2:

*LUNCH BREAK*
 


Sheila back to SR2;

earlier today SRM P moved from 179 to 50. 1 1/4 inch move on SR2

Moved 1/4 inch backward. moved SRM P from 50 to 76

Sheila is happy with SR2 centering.

Jason is setting iris on OM1. Beam on OM1 ugly? due to crater on OFI?

ASC_AS_C P -0.6 Y -0.6

open GV for HAM7. send SQZ beam. seed dither lock is very noisy.

SQZ beam is close to AUX laser?

AUX power measurement

Comments related to this report
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 13:49, Thursday 25 July 2024 (79313)

First three attached photos are of the aux laser steering mirror we swapped in, original mirror in 79253.

Fourth photo is the iris we places between the aux laser beamsplitter and SRM. Once we were finished with the alignment Jenne and Sheila recentered this iris on the beam. 

The power measurements recorded are with the AUX laser as we had trouble dither locking the SQZ seed beam. More details:

  • 1.72mW before SRM (SR2 side)
  • 0.605mW just after SRM (Good, expect 0.602mW =  35% transmitted = 0.35 x 1.72mW)
  • 0.45mW after KTP and TGG before TFP (expect 100% throughput so are loosing 25% through OFI)
  • 0.380mW before OM1 (some power lost through wring polarization to OFI rejected path? Didn't confirm).
Fifth image is the SQZ beam after passing through the OFI and SRM. Can see a big whole in the middle of the beam!! We expect this is from passing through the KTP crater! Still not easy to tell which crater the beam is passing though.
Note that the aux laser beam is too small to tell by eye if there is a hole in it, but once we got the alignment better, the beam quality seemed to decrease and the beam become dimmer.

Sixth image is the SQZ beam and aux laser beam (smaller) after SRM. They are misaligned in yaw. 

Seventh image is te  SQZ beam and aux laser beam (below) before OM1. They are misaligned in pitch.

Images attached to this comment
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - 10:18, Thursday 01 August 2024 (79402)EPO

Tagging for EPO.

H1 ISC
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - posted 22:03, Tuesday 23 July 2024 - last comment - 10:18, Thursday 01 August 2024(79291)
HAM 5 alignment laser day 2

Sheila, Jason, Jennie, Keita, Jenne, Camilla, Naoki. Following 79274.'

Summary:  We still need more work on the alignment laser tomorow.  Today we believe that we understood the right process for setting it up, but we will need to iterate a few more times to get it set.

  • This morning when we went to the chamber we saw the reflection from one of the ITMs coming back near SRM, we were confused by this for a minute and misaligned the ITMs. 
  • Jennie found we needed to move SRM Yaw to 136 on the osems 79272, we did this (could see the beam slightly move but barely) and then touched the AUX laser BS to center the retrofection on the iris right after the laser.
  • Beam was on AS_C (170uW vs 100uW blocked) but not centered (-0.3 pit; +0.2 yaw)
  • Jennie found we were off 10urad in Pitch and moved SRM to 659.9 uradians on osems. This was not visible on the iris but we again touched the AUX laser BS to center the retrofection on the iris right after the laser (wasn't centered this morning <1mm off but was centered last night).
  • Sheila entered the chamber and walked to SR2, the beam was well centered in yaw but somewhat less than an inch too low.  Jenne moved SRM by about 350urad in pitch to bring the beam closer to center.
  • Jenne put SRM back half way to the starting place (so that we were half way between the alignment that gave us a good centering on SR2, and the one that we think should be close to what we had in lock.  Then Jason, Jenne, and Keita walked the temporary steering mirror and beamsplitter.  They moved the beam splitter to bring the beam lower on OM1, since they noticed that it was slightly high of center, and then walked the mirrors to restore the retroreflection on the iris right after the collimator. 
  • The combination of these moves meant that the beam was very low on SR2, clipping on the scrapper baffle and hitting the optic right at the bottom, around the level of the earthquake stops.
  • We took a lunch break, and installed an iris in front of OM1 to mark that position, and set SRM back to the alignment that we think that we were using for locking.  Jenne Jason and Naoki tried to move the beam the restore the retroreflection while keeping the beam on the OM1 iris, they found that in order to do that they had to move the beam visibly low on the Faraday aperture, on the temporary beam splitter (which Betsy set to 8.3", the SRM center height.).  We then realized that this might be because the beam has been high of center on OM1 while we have been locking, consistent with the fast shutter bouncing. 
  • We decided to move the beam closer to center in the OFI aperture, and the temporary beamsplitter, and allow it to be above center on OM1.  After this Jenne, Naoki and Jason realigned so that the beam was retroreflected with SRM aligned as we think it was for locking.  I went into the chamber again to look at the beam position, and found it was between 2 and 3 inches to low (a bit more than the height of the thorlabs beam card), and about 1 cm off in the -X direction.
  • When I left, the team was planning to reset the iris by OM1, and possibly make a move of SRM and walk the temporary mirror + BS to restore the retro reflection and spot position on OM1 iris.  If this worked we will check in the morning where the beam is on SR2. 

 

Comments related to this report
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 23:10, Tuesday 23 July 2024 (79292)

It's useful to know the geometry of this setup.

The SRM is a convex mirroor with R=5.678m ROC (and therefore a converging flat-convex lens with f=12.6m focal length).

All rays retro-reflected by the SRM HR surface converge at a single point. Because of the lensing effect of SRM, this point is NOT the center of the ROC but away from SRM by Rf/(R+f)=3.92m. OM1 is 3.65m away from SRM. These are all you need to know (plus a basic knowledge of thin lens), but I drew a cartoon for you (1st attached, top, but you can also see 2nd attachment for the math) where four different rays, all retro-reflected by SRM, are converging at one point.

Now, Sheila's 3rd bullet point from the bottom is like the green line in the cartoon. The green dot at the OM1 position marks the center of the OM1, however there's only one ray that is retroreflected and goes through the center of OM1 (green line), which happens to be VERY low on SRM.

Without touching SRM, we can walk the beam on SRM while keeping the retroreflection and bring up the position at SRM by deltax, and as a result the beam position goes up about 0.07*deltax at OM1 and about 3.7*deltax on SR2.

Note that a small pit offset on OM1 has a big effect on SRM and SR2, i.e. 1mm on OM1 will become 14mm at SRM and 54mm at SR2.

Images attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 23:41, Tuesday 23 July 2024 (79293)

SR2 beam position when Sheila left was 1cm to +X, too low by 3"~76mm (i.e. the beam needed to move to -X by 1cm, up by 3"~76mm).

Now the task is to rotate the SRM, maintain the retroreflection while keeping the beam position on OM1. This is explained in the attached cartoon again. Anyway, conclusion is that if we want to move the beam up by deltay at SR2, we have to rotate SRM by deltay/215m, i.e. deltay/[SRM rotation] ~ 2mm/10urad.

(The calculation in the attached assumes that we're fixing the OM1 beam position, but in reality the iris is maybe 50cm or so closer to SRM, so L=3.15 instead of 3.65. This should have a large effect on one of the important numbers d-L=3.92m-L, it changes from 0.27 to 0.77. Mostly because of this, my calculation is severely overestimating the deltay/[SRM rotaion] maybe by a factor of 3, roughly.)

Anyway,we used 2mm/10urad number at the time, and moved SRM in PIT by negative 380urad (PIT slider 2121 -> 1741, YAW slider -3492 no change).

At this point we reset the position of the iris to the beam. Naoki, Jason and Jenne adjusted the steering mirror and the BS so the beam hits the center of the iris while keeping the retroreflection. We stopped the work there.

Images attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 06:32, Wednesday 24 July 2024 (79295)

This is a picture of Sheila entering HAM4-HAM5 tube through the eye-shaped baffle.

Images attached to this comment
jason.oberling@LIGO.ORG - 06:31, Wednesday 24 July 2024 (79296)

Should also add that when restoring the aux laser alignment to OM1 position and the retroreflection iris in the afternoon, the alignment converged much quicker when using the beamsplitter to align the retroreflection and the steering mirror to align OM1 position.  In the morning we were doing the opposite (beamsplitter to OM1, steering mirror to retroreflection), and while we were able to get the alignment to converge it was picky and had a tendency to diverge if we made large steps.

After working through the math Keita had said this might be the case.  Our first run at restoring the aux laser alignment in the afternoon, still using beamsplitter to OM1 and steering mirror to retroreflection, was diverging when we were moving in the direction we clearly had to move, so we switched to beamsplitter to retroreflection and steering mirror to OM1; alignment went much smoother afterwards.

corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - 10:18, Thursday 01 August 2024 (79401)EPO

Tagging for EPO.

H1 AOS (ISC)
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - posted 21:32, Monday 22 July 2024 - last comment - 10:18, Thursday 01 August 2024(79274)
HAM6 AUX laser alignment (1) (Francisco, Naoki, Betsy, Sheila, Keita)

We aligned the AUX laser in HAM5 so that it is roughly centered on OM1 AND is retroreflected by SRM. We haven't checked anything else.

Retroreflection was measured/evaluated using an iris right in front of the AUX laser launcher telescope. First the iris was well centered relative to the input light (1st attachment shows the scattering around the iris when it was closed down a bit), and we used a steering mirror and a beam splitter installed between the AUX laser and the SRM to get the SRM reflection coming back to the iris AND SRM transmission hitting the center of OM1 without touching SRM. It was easy. 2nd attachment shows the return beam on the iris after REALLY closing down the iris so the return beam clips on it. Centering on OM1 was based on just eyeballing using a sensor card.

We don't know where on the SRM or OFI the beam was (no easy reference). It seems that the beam was seen by ASC-AS_C but not centered on it.

The above was done before we were informed about a large ISI/HEPI rotation in YAW (alog 79272) so probably we'll do it again after moving SRM to compensate to get closer to the right alignment quickly (rather than walking the beam from where we are now slowly, checking the OM1 centering and SRM retroreflection many, many times).

In the end, we should make the SRM transmission hit the center of AS_C, make the beam retro reflected by SRM, and make the SRM reflection hit the center of SR2, all at the same time. For that, probably we'll have to make a minor adjustment to SRM.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
betsy.weaver@LIGO.ORG - 15:13, Tuesday 23 July 2024 (79287)

We also did a bit more looking at the Fast Shutter. While the optical surface and wires appear fine, there is also a strange heat/burn mark on the side of the toaster optic, low. Possibly the heat mark from the bumper bar above reflected something down to this side surface??

Note, best last pictures of Fast Shutter from last vent are at alog 60724.

Images attached to this comment
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - 10:18, Thursday 01 August 2024 (79400)EPO

Tagging for EPO.

Displaying reports 6301-6320 of 83393.Go to page Start 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 End