From a trend of the temperature it appears to have stopped on 6/27/2014 21:35 UTC (6/27/2014 14:35 PDT).
no restarts reported.
Met One "JF-1"
In the 16' cubed cleanroom in the beer garden prior to starting any in-chamber work:
0.3um 30
0.5um 10
1.0um 10
At the end of in-chamber activity, data taken in-chamber with counter sitting on flooring ~near ACB and QUAD (draw fan was in-place for ~2 hours of prior in-chamber work, and while counts taken):
0.3um 120
0.5um 50
1.0um 30
The IAS and SUS teams are looking into why the ACB alignment in BSC3 is off by 8mm. SUS is checking the F2 and F3 BOSEMs on ITMX. Aidan is working on the Hartman alignment at End-X and End-Y. End station will be lase hazard during this work. ISS – LVEA will be laser safe during the day and laser hazard after 16:00. They are staging for installation work at HAM2. EE working on power at HAM2 and pulling cables at End-Y.
K. Ryan, J. Worden, R. Weiss The report is attached below. The upper limit for the air leak rate into Y2 is Q = 1.12e-8 torr liters/sec. The hydrogen outgassing rate at 23C is J= 2.13 e -14 torr liters/sec cm^2, consistent with the value measured in 2000.
Advanced LIGO stochastic searches may be limited by geomagnetic fields that are correlated between sites (here). To study the possibility of subtracting out their effects on the gravitational wave channels, we have been testing sensitive magnetometers (the geomagnetic fields are mostly under a couple of pT / sqrt(Hz) around 10 Hz) and investigating sites with low local magnetic contamination: subtraction would require that we monitor the geomagnetic fields with good SNR (here).
Nelson C. procured, for evaluation, a LEMI-120 magnetometer (a similar model is used by Virgo) with a KMS-820 data acquisition unit from KMS Technologies, Houston, Texas. The KMS unit was very robust, reliable, and the software user-friendly: not a single data set, even in harsh conditions, was lost. The KMS system noise floor is under the LEMI-120 floor of about 0.01 pT/sqrt(Hz) at 10 Hz.
In order to find good sites, away from people and far from transmission lines, we used transmission line maps from BPA, and Google satellite images. Figure 1 shows the locations we selected for magnetic field measurements, which include our own vault on the LHO site because of the ease of installation and maintenance. To zoom in on a site and switch to satellite view, you can bring up my Google map by entering the following into Google Maps search: https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?authuser=0&vps=2&hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&output=kml&msid=214673919740447019408.0004fc5c3f61ab108b5f5
Figure 2 shows photographs of the sites. The magnetometer is buried to reduce artifacts from motion in the earth’s field. Figure 3 shows spectra. In terms of low background noise the best site was Table Mountain (National Forest) at 180 km, followed by Drumheller Channels (US Fish and Wildlife) at 56 km, followed by our own on-site vault. Rattlesnake Mountain was no better than the vault.
The longest data sets were taken at the quietest site, Table Mountain: a NS dataset of about 1 hour and an EW set of about 2 hours and 40 minutes. Also a test was made of whether fields from the data acquisition system were being detected was made by moving the acquisition system from 17 m to 8 m and 3 m. No difference between 17 m and 8 m spectra is evident, but there seems to be some contamination in the 3 m spectrum (Figure 4); All other data sets were taken with the acquisition system at 17m or more.
Also, a test of the effect of motion of field perturbing materials was made by waving a shovel at 17m at about 0.5 Hz (Figure 5), the effect was significant, but we made every effort to minimize motion for the rest of the data sets, and, in any case, transients would show up in comparisons of multiple spectra taken with the same conditions.
Pretty much all spectra in Figure 3, except for the one from my office, show lightning driven Schumann resonances (at the ~8Hz fundamental, associated with light propagation time around the earth, and above), but with SNRs that are worse for locations with larger 60 Hz signals. It will be interesting to model how well subtraction could work with an easily installed vault magnetometer vs. a more remote site.
The high-resolution spectra at the end of Figure 3 show a large resonance at about 0.01 Hz that is consistent with Pc4 band Ultra Low Frequency waves from magnetohydrodynamic waves in the magnetosphere, a frequency band associated with resonant azimuthal waves driven by the vertical E x B drift of ions bouncing between the magnetic mirrors at the poles (e.g. here).
Robert Schofield, Christina Daniel, Margarita Vidreo
no restarts reported
J. Kissel, A. Pele, B. Weaver, T. Sadecki The Message: We believe that something has gone wrong with the F3 and F3 OSEMs on the reaction chain of H1SUSITMX -- the magnitude of the L2L and Y2Y (i.e. the DOFs that are controled by F2 and F3) is a factor of 1.5 or 2.1 too low. All other DOFs are healthy -- T2T, V2V, R2R, and P2P do not show this discrepancy. This should halt closeout until we figure this out. This L2L and L2Y discrepancy is supported by looking at the F2 and F3 response to L, P, and Y excitation. After respecting the phase, one also finds the overall sign of the transfer function suspiciously wrong (should be 0 at DC, and it's +/- 180 [deg]). We do NOT believe: - it is rubbing. All degrees of freedom's resonances are at the correct frequency, matching model and previous data. All DOFs resonances are also well-defined and highly Q'd. - it is something wrong with the stiffness / mechanical parameters of suspension. Stiffness would only alter the low-frequency magnitude, and mechanical parameters that affect L and Y (a) would also affect resonance frequencies, but more importantly (b) are only dependent on simple parameters such as mass and wire lengths, of which we are using all the same parts as before but for the UIM mass itself (which again, if THAT were the smoking gun, other DOFs and al resonances would be affected). - it is the calibration. One calibration is used for all degrees of freedom, we would see the same discrepancy in all DOFs if this were the case. - it is any element of the electronics chain prior to the OSEMs themselves. Thankfully, the two OSEMs under suspect -- F2 and F3 -- control the common and differential mode of related DOFs, so their cables can be swapped. Doing so did not affect the L to F3F3 results, but they did affect Y to F2F3 results. After swapping the cables, The Y2Y transfer function got *worse* and matched the L2L discrepancy. - it is an error of the digital parameters. Gains and signs of OSEMINF, OSEM2EUL, TEST, EUL2OSEM, and COILOUTF filter banks and matrices have all been double checked today. Attached are two sets of comparisons. The first shows all DOFs compared against previous instances of this QUAD, and a comparison with an LLO equivalent. 2013−11−22 is a healthy L1 chain. 2013-11-27 is H1SUSETMX healthy, prior to the ITM swap. 2014-06-27_1530 is today's measurements with F2 and F3 correctly connected to the digital system. 2014-06-27_2117 is today's measurement with F2 and F3 cables swapped at the OSEM in vacuum. The second is 3 pages comparing the L to F2F3 TFs, and 3 pages comparing the Y to F2F3 TFs, in the same order. The first of the three shows the expected results from the 2013-11-26 data set, the second shows the initial discrepant results from 2014-06-27_1530. The third, from 2014-06-27_2117. Arnaud has launched overnight matlab transfer functions, in case there're more clues buried in a cleaner measurement. As a reminder, the main chain looks completely healthy, and everything has been IAS blessed, so this is (sadly) the last mystery before close-out begins. Ideas to try on Monday: - Redo OSEM open light current assessment, to see if the LEDs have somehow lost half their power - Swap out F2 and F3 OSEMs for fresh OSEMs. New data can be found here /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGR0/Data/2014-06-27*.xml and exported to similar names, and captured in the .mat file /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGR0/Results/2014-06-27_*.mat New versions of /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/MatlabTools/ plotquad_dtttfs.m plotallquad_dtttfs.m have been committed to the SusSVN. The former has had improvements made to the plotting routine, and the latter has just had these new measurements added to the measurement list.
Particle counts from todays work in HAM2
Morning start of work day, counts taken in cleanroom
0.3um....10 counts
Remainder...zero counts
Morning start of shift, counts taken in chamber
0.3um...20 counts
0.5um...10 counts
0.7um....10 counts
1.0um...10 counts
Remainder....0 counts
Morning end of of shift, counts taken in chamber
0.3um....160 counts
0.5um....40 counts
0.7um ....20 counts
Remainder...zero counts
Afternoon start of shift in cleanroom:
All zeros
Afternoon start of shift in chamber
0.3um...30 counts
0.5um...20 counts
Remainder...zero counts
Afternoon end of shift in chamber
0.3um...50 counts
0.5um...20 counts
0.7um....20 counts
1.0 um..20 counts
2.0um...20 counts
5.0um...0 counts
J. Kissel As of 1087941856 Jun 27 2014 22:04:00 UTC Jun 27 2014 15:04:00 PDT I'm turning off all control to H1SUSETMY H1SUSETMX H1SUSTMSY H1SUSTMSX for a few hours such that high-frequency resolution ASDs can be gathered by the DetChar team. HEPIs and ISIs are otherwise fully isolated and performing well. I'll turn them back on before I leave in a few hours. Look for a comment to this aLOG as confirmation.
Aidan need the ETMX chamberfor a bit so I had to cut H1SUSETMX and H1SUSTMTX's three hours short, so they were redamped at around 16:15 local time. I've now undamped them again, as of 1087956316 Jun 28 2014 02:05:00 UTC Jun 27 2014 19:05:00 PDT I have redamped and realigned ETMY as of 1087958596 Jun 28 2014 02:43:00 UTC Jun 27 2014 19:43:00 PDT I don't want to stay any longer, so I've set up a shell command to redamp the SUS at 1087966936 Jun 28 2014 05:02:00 UTC Jun 27 2014 22:02:00 PDT which should give you plenty of time.
Volker, Matt H, Corey, Rick S, Guido, Rodica (remote), Rich A (remote)
Quick summary of work on the ISS array this week (I will write a more detailed alog later with details on cabling, mode matching, lens/mirror/ISS array positions, what optics used, photos, etc)
The beamsplitter mount ROM RH4 on HAM2 was swapped out for one that was controllable with pico motors. The in-air cabling was hooked up to a feedthrough port and tested with a temporary setup controlling it on the in-air side. All degrees of freedom work.
Lots of work was spent getting the lenses in the correct spot so that the beam waist and position was in the correct spot, no clipping, etc. The mirror in AROM RH2 was swapped for a flat mirror and the beam is now directed onto the entrance aperture of the ISS array. The lenses were tilted off axis a little bit to make sure no back reflected beam went directly back into the system and black glass beam dumps were installed to try to catch these back reflected beams (positions guessed as we cant see the back reflected beams).
We had to move a couple dumps/baffles into slightly different positions to make things fixed and we had to alter the in-air cable dressing that was done previously as it went right where we wanted to put stuff. All cables have been redressed up to the feedthrough but NO ground loop hunting done on cables yet. SEI personnel might want to check my cable routing from feedthrough to stage zero to stage 1 on the ISI, but I am pretty confident its okay.
Next week.....trying to get the quadrant detector and photodiodes aligned
Great job Matt, Volker, et al. The figures look good (except for the stains on the baffle in pic 21). A suggestion to check the position of the black glass: Is it possible to get a little red laser from the back of the beam splitter through the lenses to have a rough check of the location of the pick-offs. There should be enough back scatter from a red laser. Thanks a lot folks.
For the latest round of ISS array improvements, pico motors were added to the beamsplitter AROM4 (Fig 7 in T13000327), however it seemed to have slipped through the net which feedthrough the additional in-vacuum cables need to be attached to.
Consulting with Eddie, S at CIT he gave this initial recommendation based on what knowledge he had about available feedthroughs on the HAM2 chamber: this leave us with D1-3C2 and D3-F10 as the only viable options. We'll need 156" or a 180" cable to get from CB-6 to either D1 or D3,
With regards to the new Picomotor being installed in HAM2, the cabling is the following:
picomotor--->D1101515 (quad mighty mouse)--->CB6?--->D1101659 (seis resp cable)
However the D1101659's are only 108", and it didnt appear we had a longer cable on hand.
Thus I did a survey of the feedthroughs on HAM2 and I have marked up where there are unused ports in the attached pdf (hopefully you can understand my chicken scratch). I have not labeled which is D1, D2, etc.
There are a number of spare ones that it appears we could use, the most convenient (for a number of reasons) is the feedthrough in what I believe is the SW corner which has 2 unused ones. These are actually allocated for IO for the adaptive optics.
I requested to use the bottom one of these two unused ports (marked with a star). I have checked verbally with Guido and he was happy for us to use it, as is Hugh and Calum.
It was also suggested initially to swap out the CB6 "L" cable bracket from a 2-tier to a 3-tier. I however recommended adding an additional single cable high "L" cable bracket near the edge of the table on the western side near IM1. It is out of the way of any beams (and would be below beams anyway). This will help us use the short (108") cable we have available to go from feedthrough to this cable bracket and also trying to swap out CB6 with a 3 high cable bracket….though possible has the potential for me to bang/hit/damage something. My suggestion seems a simple and safe solution. Calum and I checked with Hugh about rebalancing and he doesn't see it as a big issue. Volker and I don't think it will be in the way of anything.
After the lenses were put into position and the AROM2 mirror placed back in position I completed the in-vacuum cabling from the feedthrough, to stage zero of the ISI, from stage zero to stage 1, to the new "L" cable bracket. Corey had already connected up the picomotor to the D1101515 cable (he told me he used the longest of the 4 cables which would be the 60" long one cable, "cable #4", connector "J5").
With the 3 spare unused cables I dressed them near the edge of the table so that the connectors were floating in free space. The location of the added "L" cable bracket and the routing/dressing of the in-vacuum cables can be seen in the photos
Now that we have the additional pico motor in chamber we now also need to think about how to hook it up/control it from the in-air side. I posed this Q to Rich A and here was his initial suggestion.
1. We can (if we are careful) use 28 AWG wire inside the vacuum system, which will free us up as far as finding the correct length (156 inches)
2. The only way we can use 28 AWG wire inside the vacuum system will be if we use less than ~50 feet of 22 AWG wire outside the vacuum system.
3. Assuming we use the one spare axis available on top of IOT2L (as provided by Picomotor Driver #3), we can stay within the 50 foot limit
4. A special cable will have to be made that goes between the RJ-9 style connector (see connector.jpg) on the one available output of the Picomotor driver and the 25 pin vacuum feedthrough.
5. The Picomotor driver front panel looks like this: (see picomotor.png)
As you can see, there are two 25 pin connectors that are normally used to drive each picomotor. In parallel with these 25 pin connectors are the individual motor connectors shown in a phone jack style connector. This is how we will pick up the one unused axis for HAM2 ISS steering.
6. The interface between the phone jack and a D-sub can be done by making a short transition cable to D-9
7. Now we just make a 9 pin to 25 pin cable. Easy.
What Rich will need is:
1. The length for the in-air cable from Picomotor controller number 3 to the proposed vacuum feedthrough
2. Account number
3. Permission and agreement from Systems and PSL
I have forwarded this request onto SYS and PSL representativies
Apologies in advance. This will contain quite a lot of detail and be quite verbose but want to get everything down whilst still fresh in my mind
We were tasked with installing new picomotors in the setup for the ISS array and also getting the mode matching correct for the ISS array.
Moving ISS Array
We were informed that the ISS array was initially installed in the incorrect location as the cookie cutter was used upside down. Thus the first thing we did was to put the cookie cutter back on (correct way up) and move the ISS array into what should be a more correct position. This moved the ISS array more towards the center of the table.
PicoMotor on mounts Swap
All that had to occur here was to swap out the fixed mount ROM RH4 (see Figure 7 of T13000327) that the beamsplitter optic site in for one that is controllable by picomotors (note AROM RH2..the last mirror before the ISS array) is already controlled by picomotors.
Before anything was swapped out, AROM RH2 was removed and the beam direction off of ROM RH4 was marked with irises (this is so that we could get the same alignment as currently there back. The base was kept in the same position and the current fixed mirror mount swapped out with one that is pico controlled. The same beam splitter optic was used. The mount was adjusted until the beam went back on the same alignment as before the swap. (One thing to note....and should be able to see on one of the pics in this log, is that the beamsplitter isnt located exactly as per its supposed location in D0901083 v12. Its about 1/2" further from ROM RH3 than design. This is no big deal other than when trying to pre plan on where clamps, etc can go). We tested that the beam from the beamsplitter heading past the ISS array has no clipping by the lid on the ISS array, and its not close to clipping.
See above in the comment section about the in-vacuum cabling of the picomotors. With the in-vacuum cable connected to the feedthrough, a temporary in-air setup was used to test that the picomotors worked. They did successfully.
Note: The Kapton "washers" have not been put in as we have only just got the Kapton sheet into clean and bake
ISS array mode matching
T1400176 gave various recommendations on how the mode matching to the ISS array could be performed. The decision made by SYS, et. al. was to use the two telescope lens solution. In particular Case 1 in Table 3, which is for the first lens after the beamsplitter to be a 2" lens of FL 343.6mm and the second lens to be a 1" lens of FL -171.9mm.
The initial position of where these lenses should go is indicated in D0901083 v12 Sheet 2. However with AROM RH2 still out (from above work) and before we put the lenses in, an iris was positioned in the beam path, and a beam scan on a rail (wiped down and wrapped in foil where appropriate) was bolted to the table (see pic beamscan) in an orientation so that the beam was centered on the beamscan as slid the beamscan back and forth along the rail. These will also act as our targets to check that we have the lenses positioned so that the beam goes through the center of the lenses.
The edge of the rail was positioned roughly in the same location as the optic in AROM RH2. This means that the focus should be roughly 16" (40cm) from the edge of this rail. So where do I get the 16" from. Well it is approximately 10" from AROM RH2 to the entrance of the ISS array, and then Ollie informed Volker that the beam travels 6" inside the ISS array (I dont know where he got the 6" from, but thats what we are going with). Also in Table 3 in T1400176 the waist is called out to be 304um, however Rick S informed Volker and I that we should be shooting for something more like 250um if we can.
The lenses were positioned roughly as per the positions indicated in D0901083 v12 Sheet 2 and it was very quickly seen that the focus position was not even close to the location wanted. After discussion with Guido M. Rodica M, it was decided that we could just slide the lens positions down stream a bit and shouldnt have to much affect. So we moved them both approximately 4" downstream (as indicated by the blue "A"s (seen in New Location for L1L2 pdf). We did notice that the beam onto the beam scan was hitting lower on the beamscan than without the lenses in but we made no attempt to fix that at the moment (more on that later).
Moving the lenses moved the waist position like we expected and so we had an initial go at taking some measurements with the beam scan. Below is the raw data:
| Distance from Rail edge (cm) | Beam Diameter (13.5%) in X (um) | Beam Diameter (13.5%) in y (um) |
|---|---|---|
| 23 | 420 | 430 |
| 21 | 413 | 420 |
| 19 | 413 | 430 |
| 17 | 419 | 448 |
| 15 | 439 | 470 |
| 13 | 470 | 500 |
| 11 | 508 | 430 |
| 9 | 555 | 570 |
| 7 | 605 | 620 |
| 5 | 660 | 670 |
Couple other notes:
As Volker and I were dressed up and in chamber, Rick S kindly volunteered to plot the data. The results can be seen in 1st scan horizontal.pdf and 1st scan vertical.pdf
As can be seen in these results, the waist is to small and still not in the correct location. However now that we have some results, using the jamMT program Rick had on the computer, we could use the results we have above and the lens positions to work backwards on what the incoming beam profile is actually like so that we could then alter the lens positions to get the beam size and focal position where we want. The results can be seen in jammt final solution.pdf (note the origin in the horizontal axis is where the edge of the rail is (ie the position roughly of the AROM RH2 mirror)).
The lenses were positioned in the positions as indicated by the jamMT solution and we did another beam scan measurement. Below is the results:
| Distance from Rail edge (cm) | Beam Diameter (13.5%) in X (um) | Beam Diameter (13.5%) in y (um) |
|---|---|---|
| 23 | 637 | 685 |
| 21 | 690 | 725 |
| 19 | 735 | 750 |
| 17 | 780 | 800 |
| 15 | 840 ?? | 842 |
| 13 | 855 | 890 |
| 11 | 910 | 945 |
| 9 | 960 | 1000 |
| 7 | 1010 | 1055 |
| 5 | 1030 | 1107 |
Couple other notes:
Again because Volker and I were in chamber, Rick S again plotted the results for us. These can be seen in 2nd scan horizontal.pdf and 2nd scan vertical.pdf
The results are pretty much bang on what we wanted. Great.
Now that the lenses positions are known we wanted to look at the beam being directed down vertically some (1-2mm) with the lenses in compared to not being in. This means that the beam is not going through the center of the lenses. However with the spacers we had available, we could not find a nice solution, short of kludging together something with washers. However Rick S suggested (and also wanted us to look at anyway) just how sensitive the telescope was if alter the picos on the beamsplitter ie do we need to tilt the mount a lot to get any change). Turns out we dont and its very sensitive so only a small amount of movement of the mirror mounts vertical position moved the beam back to the position we needed (sure this still means that the beam isnt going through the center of the lenses, but we now have the beam height as we want it). Again not a perfect solution but works with what have on hand.
We aso put in the back glass beam dumps. We had to position these by eye/guesstimation as we couldnt see the back reflected light. But we did our best to make sure they clip no beams on the table
Directing beam onto ISS array
Now that the mode matching is right, we can now direct it onto the ISS array. First off we need to swap out the curved optic that was initially in AROM RH2 for a flat mirror. The details of the mirror swapped in can be seen in optic used in AROM2 pic.
This optic had first contact painted on both sides of the mirror, but it also unfortunately in marker had the details of the optic written on the barrel (see pic writing on optic). Decided to try cleaning it off with fresh acetone and the swabs (see pic cleaning optic). The marker came off after a few swabs, and then we used 3-4 swabs on the barrel after we were confident it was clean just to be sure.
Before putting the optic into the mount the back first contact was removed (not using top gun (decision made in consultation with Calum)) and then the optic placed in the mount (see pic optic with first contact). Once mirror installed in position indicated in D0901083 v12 sheet 2 we removed the other layer of first contact.
Rick S gave us circular inserts that go into the aperture of the ISS array (I dont have a pic or a DCC number sorry) and by putting the mid size one into the aperture we were able to direct the beam (using AROM2 to adjust the beam direction and a handheld IR viewer to see whats going on) until it was centered on the hole in the insert. This should have the beam initially aligned to the ISS array as was our task :-)
We then put the SiCarbide baffle which goes in front of the ISS array (with the two holes) back into position. To enable the beam to go through the two holes we had to move the Brewster angled beam dump that is near the side of the ISS array and dumps a beam from HAM1 (I dont know its designation), closer to the edge of the table to allow the baffle we are trying to put in, in.
Everything was then dog clamped down and in-vacuum cables dressed
Pics:
Pic 7-13...are pics of the various components altered/installed so as the as built drawings can be updated
Pic 14 shows the one tiny bit of free space that is still on the table
Pic 15 shows roughly the "beams" view as going from IM1 to IM2 showing should be no clipping of this beam by black glass installed
For bookkeeping's sake, will go with the following labeling/naming of new/changed optics:
Betsy, Travis, Jason
The reaction chain TFs for ITMx failed last night. Upon running them with DTT this morning, we saw some very subtle cross coupling in the L and Yaw TFs. We went into the chamber and tightened up the mounting of the reaction chain BOSEMs which seemed a little rattly. We also attempted to relieve some of the stiffness of the reaction chain cabling which runs between the UIM and PenRe mass of the suspension. The softening of the cables seemed to improve one of the subtleties, but not the other. This is still being worked on via cable checks at the OSEMs. TBC...
Meanwhile, we installed ACB target and Jason looked at the ACB alignment. Unfortunately he found that it is ~8mm off in the lateral (!) direction. This is completely baffling (!) to us since this baffle has been mounted since the arm was used in HIFOx. Indeed, when you eye-ball the baffle to the optics it does look offset. So, I guess it is assumed we will fix this on Monday via shoving the whole baffle over (somehow while it is mounted behind the support tube).
[Sheila, Kiwamu]
This morning, we switched the simulated laser from the 532nm to 1064 nm one to make the alignment work more reliable. After that, we managed to finish all the necessary work for installing the 90/10 BS in POP. We are done.
Some pictures are available in Resourcespace (https://ligoimages.mit.edu/?c=1483).
(Installation of a 1064 nm laser)
The difficulties we had yesterday were due to the use of a green laser (see alog 12507) although green light is usually more convenient than IR since it is visible and therefore easy to handle. In addition to it, a concern we had is that insertion of the 90/10 BS in the path may further reduce the power of the green light and consequently may make it difficult for us to find the HR reflected light which had been an issue yesterday and in the past. To asses this power reduction issue, we temporarily inserted the BS to see how dim the beam would become. The BS reflected seemingly more than 50 % of the green light and therefore it was far from transparent. We decided to switch the laser to a 1064 nm one.
(Alignment work)
We changed the injection path such that the IR laser bypasses PR2 as PR2 has an extremely low transmissivity for 1064 nm. We placed the fiber launcher at the east side on the table and placed a temporary steering mirror in front of the 1st picomotorized mirror (M1). In this way, the simulated beam skipped PR2 and the 3" mirror behind PR2 and joined the real path before M1. This worked really well. We could obtain decent alignment after approximately half an hour of alignment work on the fiber launcher and temporary steering mirror. We checked the centering on the QPDs by looking at MEDM screens and confirmed that both QPD A and B were well centered.
(Insertion of BS and more alignment)
We placed the BS and its associated V-black glasses according to the drawing (D0901094). Then the misalignment caused by the insertion of the BS was compensated by steering the two picomotorized mirrors (i.e. M1 and M2) by hand. This also went very smooth. We could get back to the good alignment within half an hour or so. We checked the alignment once again with the MEDM screen and confirmed that both QPDs are well centered. To wrap up the mission, we then took out the temporary steering mirror and fiber launcher out of the HAM3 chamber. We are done.
Morning Shift 0800-1200 (Corey covering afternoon)
838 – HAM2 setup (Corey and Matt H)
849 – Thomas, Vern, Eric Gustafson doing OpLev survey in corner
station, following by end stations
902 – Aaron to EX for cable pull (with Manny)
903 – Arnaud beginning measurements at ITMX…should take half
hour
905 – Matt Heintze and Janeen walkabout in LVEA
930 – Jeff/Andres/Calum/Kate to EX for surveys in preparation
for EX vent
1035 – Thomas transitioning End-X to laser HAZARD
1038 – Jeff + Andres foiling and modifying airflows around
IMC chambers in LVEA
1051 – Jason investigating a rubbing issue on ITMX
model restarts logged for Thu 26/Jun/2014
2014_06_26 10:34 h1iopsusey
2014_06_26 10:39 h1iopseiey
2014_06_26 11:17 h1hpietmy
2014_06_26 11:17 h1isietmy
2014_06_26 11:17 h1susetmy
2014_06_26 11:17 h1sustmsy
2014_06_26 11:33 h1iopsusex
2014_06_26 11:35 h1iopseiex
2014_06_26 11:39 h1hpietmx
2014_06_26 11:39 h1isietmx
2014_06_26 11:39 h1sustmsx
2014_06_26 11:41 h1susetmx
2014_06_26 13:18 h1broadcast0
2014_06_26 13:18 h1dc0
2014_06_26 13:18 h1fw0
2014_06_26 13:18 h1fw1
2014_06_26 13:18 h1nds0
2014_06_26 13:18 h1nds1
no unexpected restarts. SWWD install at end stations with related DAQ restart.
Joe and Andres finished adjusting QUAD08 so I started a round of TFs on both chains at 12:52. Order is undamped M0, R0, then damped M0 and R0.
First set of measurement failed. Started them again at 23:52:23 UTC.
Transfer functions ran yesterday in the staging building are showing clear sources of rubbing especially in the pitch/length/yaw degrees of freedom for the reaction chain. Main chain has large unexpected cross couplings in pitch.
Andres and Jeff realized the cover was on during that measurement, which is why results were bad. We started them again Friday overnight.
