Vac
SEI
SUS
CDS
Fac
Comm
Weekend Work: Elli and Nutsinee will be coming in to do HWS work
Work safe and have a great weekend!
Sheila, Stefan, Elli, Nic
This afternoon we got a little more time with the IFO. We redid inital alingment and were able to engage the ASC which increased our recycling gain. We were able to power up to 15 Watts without a problem, when we increased the power to 23 Watts a 0.4 Hz oscillation that showed up mostly in SRC1 PIT and SRC2 PIT knocked us out of lock. We've had difficulty in the early part of the evening with ALS, we have the glitches that show up in the arms even when only the arms are locked, reminding us of the glitches seen in alogs 17576 and 15242. As before, these glitches went away a couple of hours and we are now locking OK again.
We have reduced the time for the REFL trans ramp from 5 seconds to 1 second, this seems to be fine and we could think about making it shorter or reducing other ramp times in the final stages of CARM offset reduction. We haven't had the REFL trans lockloss today, but this problem has always been intermittent so we will have to continue locking for several days to see if speeding it up actually helped.
On June 29, 2015, LHO received a forwarded email from Hanford site personnel which contained this comment: "Beginning Monday, July 6, there will be an increase in truck traffic . . . near the 300 Area. Waste material will be shipped to the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility in central Hanford. The remediation effort will continue until the spring of 2016 . . . truck traffic will be present between the hours of 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m." The truck traffic mentioned here is the familiar ~30-ton loads in orange containers riding on transport trucks from the Hanford 300 area (~12 miles SE of LHO) to the ERDF pit (~10 miles W of LHO). One of our site contacts indicates that we can expect about 120 loads per day to ERDF (meaning 2x round trips, but the reverse trip is with an empty container). At present the hauling contractor anticipates that the loads will move only on the day shift, but these plans could change. Current daytime PEM-SEIS 1-3Hz plots show this additional traffic.
1010 hrs. local -> Spun down Y-end turbo and scroll pumps 1040 hrs. local -> Started pump cart at Y-end RGA and energized RGA filament 1105 hrs. local -> Spun down X-end turbo and scroll pumps 1530 hrs. local -> started scan of Y-end 1545 hrs. local -> Valved-out Y-end NEG 1600 hrs. local -> Valved-in Y-end NEG 1615 hrs. local -> Stopped Y-end RGA scan 16?? hrs. local -> De-energized Y-end turbo levitation 1655 hrs. local -> De-energized X-end turbo levitation
0829 - Elli to LVEA to turn on Illuminators
0848 - Elli out
0939 - Buba to Mids for fan work
0956 - Kyle to EY to turn on pumop cart
1129 - Bubba back
1144 - Nick to LVEA ISCT1
1145 - Hugh to LVEA to unlock HAM6 HEPI
1146 - Elli, Mike, and students to LVEA for quick tour
1151 - Leo starting charge measurements
1200 - Mike and students out
1210 - Hugh out
1214 - Elli out
1320 - Gerardo to EX to retrieve vac equipment then to MY
1350 - Fil to EX getting length for the new cables to be installed
1509 - Gerardo back
1516 - Kyle to EY for RGA scan
The current of the REFLAIR diode while in lock is about a factor of 10 below where shot noise is equivalent to dark noise.
In order to better understand the out-of loop behavior of the Common Mode loop, I did a lightbulb test on the REFLAIR_A diode. The thermal radiation from the lightbulb acts like a quantum limited light source at 9MHz.
The light was powered by a benchtop DC power supply. I mounted the bulb right in front of the diode and varied the DC light level (as seen by the REFLAIR_LF channel) and recorded the noise floor in the REFLAIR 9MHz demodulated channels. The whitening gain was temporarily changed from 12dB to 42dB for this test to overcome the ADC noise level.
The attached pdf file shows the noise vs current curve, and a fit. EDIT: apparently the LF channel is already calibrated in milliWatts. The 9MHz channel is not calibrated to physical units (though the calibration could be determined from the shot noise). As one can see, the light level we use in lock is about 10 times smaller than where shot noise starts to overcome dark noise.
REFLAIR also has an ND filter stack screwed directly on the diode box. Since we have so little light, maybe we should remove it.
data files
The amount of rf coming out of REFL9 in full lock (at 20+ W) is about −10 dBm, or 70 mV. It should be fine to switch over.
PCAL Laser were turned back on yesterday after the vent recovery at endstations and now the pcal calibration lines are turned on as well.
Sheila, Kiwamu, Chris, Hang An update of LHO's noise budget is attached ('NB07082015.png'). It used the data from 06/07/2015, at 4:00:00 am UTC, whose predicted BNS inspiral range should be ~60 Mpc according to the summary page. Some major updates are: 1. in SUS/ETMY, updated the ESD driver gain and the TST filter. 2. in LSC Digital, replaced the OMC Front End block. 3. in addition to those already existed 'mystery' gain blocks, some new ones were added. In order to make the NB predicted data match the measured ones (at least at high frequencies) while maintaining each DOF's open loop transfer function consistent with the measurement ('LoopGain07082015.png'), those blocks had to be added before the injection of quantum vacuum noises to have the proper suppression. This seemed indicating that the optickle model was not working perfectly? 4. A new front end calibration model was built to replace the old OAF.mdl. A comparison between the FE cal and NB was shown in 'FEcheck07082015.png'. In the plot all the blue curves were obtained from the FE Cal and green ones from the NB. Besides, I also included two plots showing the coupling from MICH (SRCL) to DARM predicted by the NB model, which was generated by measuring TF from MICH (SRCL) control signal (in [ct]) to DARM sensor (in [ct]), then dividing it by the TF from DARM cal (in [m]) to DARM sensor, so the transfer function's unit was [m/ct]. See 'MICH2DARM07082015.png' and 'SRCL2DARM07082015.png'. * 07/09/2015: font size increased. Sorry for the previous tiny font size...
After turning the HEPI loops on, noticed the drives to the ISI vertical Actuators are running about 10x higher than usual (compared to the other ISIs.) Based on the Isolation loops output, these appear to be primarily from the Z dof. I can't say how much displacement this represents but I'm sure the alignment will be fine if this offset where zero'd.
VE is done with climbing on the chamber and a lock loss provided a window. No issues unlocking and things look clear but I have not run a range of motion check. Maybe should be done but I'll think it can wait til Tuesday.
Alignment restored to historic position--that is, the reference/target position is unchanged.
Please mind the signs on the HEPI Housings
I've posted a note in the DCC with some information about our duty cycle durring ER7, and some of the causes of downtime.
https://dcc.ligo.org/DocDB/0120/T1500368/001/ER7DutyCycleNote.pdf
I will possibly update this with more information about DRMI locking durring high winds and when it is and is not necessary to wait for bounce and roll modes to ring down in the coming days.
Sheila, Elli
I moved the ITMs to improve the recycling gain, as well as the PRM. To get from a recylcing gain of just under 36 to 39 I mostly moved ITMY in yaw. This may be a different alignment than what we were using durring ER7, but it seems to be an improvement over the alingments we had yesterday, so we have updated references for now. The green alignment in the X arm did not change, but Elli and I redid the green QPD offsets and camera position for the Y arm. We lost lock and relocked allowing the ASC to engage with the guardian using these new IR QPD offsets, which was fine and brought us to a recycling gain of 39 again. For now the many people who want to do things incompatible with full locking have taken over the IFO.
Old offsets:
sheila.dwyer@opsws3:~/StripTools$ caget H1:ASC-Y_TR_A_PIT_OFFSET H1:ASC-Y_TR_A_YAW_OFFSET H1:ASC-Y_TR_B_PIT_OFFSET H1:ASC-Y_TR_A_PIT_OFFSET
In addition, ASC-Y_TR_B_YAW_OFFSET was changed from -0.237 to -0.318.
Elli, Hannah
To create a reference of the ITMX Green for locking.
Using singleImage_checkSaturation.m (/ligo/home/eleanor.king/scattering/singleImage_checkSaturation.m) we took images of the ITMX/Y Green cameras from ER7 ( /ligo/data/camera/archive/2015/06/05 "H1 ITMY Green (h1cam24)_2015-06-05-16-30-58.tiff" and "H1 ITMX Green (h1cam22)_2015-06-05-15-16-43.tiff)
Compared them with pictures taken today. (/ligo/data/camera "ITMY_green_illuminator_H1 ITMY Green (h1cam24)_2015-07-09-16-03-52.tff" and "IMTX_green_illuminator_H1 ITMX Green (h1cam22)_2015-07-09-16-03-43.tiff")
The cameras appear stable. We determined this by looking at the relative position of prominant features of the scattering.
FYI:
The lock-out on the L1 PSL is now released.
All conditions in the original memo have been met.
The release memo is here: https://dcc.ligo.org/M1500231
Following up this earlier report on pre-ER7 narrow lines in H1 DARM, attached is a corresponding list of early ER7 lines and some spectra for 30.5 hours of data from May 31 through June 4 at 13:00 UTC, based on FScans SFTs generated as of Thursday morning. Figure 1 shows the 0-2000 Hz spectrum for the early ER7 data with line labels according to the same scheme as before. Figure 2 shows the mid-May and early ER7 spectra overlain without line label clutter. Attachment 1 is the early ER7 line list (nearly identical in line frequencies but not strengths to that of mid-May) Attachment 2 is a zipped tar file of 27 sub-band spectra for early ER7 with lines labeled. Attachment 3 is a zipped tar file of 27 sub-band spectra comparing mid-May to early ER7 without labels. I haven't yet digested all of the changes from mid-May to the early ER7A data (what I call ER7A here), but here are things that are immediately apparent::
We used the coherence tool to try and see if there was a coherence between h(t) and other channels for this 36.9725 Hz noise line and its harmonics. There is a coherence between the h(t) channel and ... H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Z_DQ at 36.9725 Hz * 2 = 73.9450 Hz (definitely) 36.9725 Hz * 3 = 110.9175 Hz (barely above background) 36.9725 Hz * 4 = 147.89 Hz (definitely) 36.9725 Hz * 5 = 184.8625 Hz (above background) 36.9725 Hz * 6 = 221.8350 Hz (definitely) ... For whatever reason the even harmonics are stronger. The mat file for the coherence is here: https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~eric.coughlin/ER7/LineSearch/H1_COH_1116633616_1118275216_SHORT_1_webpage/data/H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Z_DQ_data.mat For H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_X_DQ there is a coherence with h(t) at 36.9725 Hz * 4 = 147.89 Hz (barely about background) See https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~eric.coughlin/ER7/LineSearch/H1_COH_1116633616_1118275216_SHORT_1_webpage/data/H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_X_DQ_data.mat For For H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Y_DQ there is a coherence with h(t) at 36.9725 Hz * 2 = 73.9450 Hz (barely above background) 36.9725 Hz * 4 = 147.89 Hz (above background) 36.9725 Hz * 5 = 184.8625 Hz (barely above background) 36.9725 Hz * 6 = 221.8350 Hz (above background) ... See https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~eric.coughlin/ER7/LineSearch/H1_COH_1116633616_1118275216_SHORT_1_webpage/data/H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Y_DQ_data.mat Nothing in the other magnetometers. Nelson, Eric Coughlin, Michael Coughlin
Attached is a pre-ER7 list of narrow lines seen above 5 Hz in recent H1 DARM data, along with spectra containing labels for the lines. The spectra used for line-hunting are from 18 hours of DC-readout conditions on May 17. Most of the lines were also seen in the early-May mini-run data, but are more exposed in the more sensitive May 17 data (see figure 1) Notable combs / lines:
I meant to attach the excited violin mode spectrum stack from the mini-run, not from the mid-May data, to illustrate the harmonicity of the upconversion. Here is the right plot.
We used the coherence tool on the full ER7 data to try and find coherence between h(t) and other channels for the 99.9989 Hz line and its harmonics. There is a coherence between h(t) and ... H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Z_DQ at 99.9989*1= 99.9989 Hz with coherence of 0.038 99.9989*2 = 199.9978 Hz with coherence of 0.03 99.9989*3 = 299.9967 Hz with coherence of 0.11 99.9989*4 = 399.9956 Hz with coherence of 0.11 99.9989*5 = 499.9945 Hz with coherence of 0.022 99.9989*10 = 999.989 Hz with coherence of 0.13 Similar results for H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_X_DQ H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Y_DQ H1-PEM-CS_MAG_LVEA_OUTPUTOPTICS_X_DQ H1-PEM-CS_MAG_LVEA_OUTPUTOPTICS_Y_DQ H1-PEM-CS_MAG_LVEA_OUTPUTOPTICS_Z_DQ H1:PEM-CS_MAG_LVEA_VERTEX_X_DQ H1-PEM-EY_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Y_DQ H1-PEM-EY_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Z_DQ H1-PEM-EX_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_X_DQ H1-PEM-EX_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Y_DQ H1-PEM-EX_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_Z_DQ The coherence is present but less strong in H1:PEM-CS_MAG_LVEA_VERTEX_Z_DQ 99.9989*10 = 999.989 Hz with coherence of 0.06 Not really visible in H1:PEM-CS_MAG_LVEA_VERTEX_Y_DQ We don't see this line in H1-PEM-EY_MAG_EBAY_SUSRACK_X_DQ H1-PEM-EX_MAG_VEA_FLOOR_Z_DQ H1-PEM-EX_MAG_VEA_FLOOR_Y_DQ H1-PEM-EX_MAG_VEA_FLOOR_X_DQ H1-PEM-EY_MAG_VEA_FLOOR_X_DQ H1-PEM-EY_MAG_VEA_FLOOR_Y_DQ H1-PEM-EY_MAG_VEA_FLOOR_Z_DQ Nelson, Eric Coughlin, Michael Coughlin
Screen shots of several of these ALS locklosses that seemed to go away after a few hours.
We've had a similar problem this morning. We saw one glitch at around 18:11:24 UTC, at this time we were sitting with only the arms locked and tidal from the green PDH to the ETMs.
Now the problem has gone away on its own again.