Plotted the dust trends for the past 24 hours (00:00 to 00:00)of dust monitor #5 in the Beer Garden. This cover the time period when the doors were removed from BSC1 and BSC3.
model restarts logged for Tue 03/Jun/2014
2014_06_03 10:58 h1iscey
2014_06_03 11:00 h1iscex
2014_06_03 15:52 h1sussr3
2014_06_03 15:54 h1sussrm
2014_06_03 15:55 h1isiham5
2014_06_03 16:19 h1isiham5
no unexpected restarts.
Using the TFs collected Friday/Saturday, I got the damping loops to be stable. While the doors on quiet time TFs are probably better than previous ones, the fact that they worked this times is more likely due to me actually tuning the symmetrization filters, but who knows. THe WHAM5 ISI is now damping, I'll look at Spectra tomorrow to compare.
SR3/SRM simulink models were modified this afternoon to connect the watchdog summary bit to output to HAM5 ISI model.
HAM5 simulink model was modified to add SRM and SR3 summary bits as inputs. The HAM5_PAYLOAD block was copied from HAM3 model, PR2/MC2 were replaced with SRM/SR3, as shown on screenshot. Models were rebuilt/restarted, front ends rebooted, and ham5 payload wd tested for srm and sr3.
The three models were commited under the svn.
This closes WP 4656
- 8:00 am, Cris, Christina and Karen, to the CS VEA, 1st cleaning of BSC1/BSC2 general area, cleanroom floor and curtains.
- 8:49 am, Thomas to H1CEE, TCS electronics testing.
- 9:15 am, Cyrus work on LDAP server.
- 9:35 am, Corey to CS VEA, assembly of ISCT tables for 3rd IFO.
- 9:40 am, Betsy and Travis to CS VEA, stagging of items for ITMs installation
- 9:45 am, Cris, Christina and Karen, to the CS VEA, HAM6 general cleaning for install/removal of doors.
- 10:15 am, Jeff and Andres to CS VEA, contamination control assessment for BSC1/BSC3 incursion.
- 10:36 am, Dave and Jim, work with RFM IPC per WP#4635.
- 11:00 am, Cris, Christina and Karen, to the CS VEA, 2nd cleaning of BSC1/BSC2 general area.
- 1:05 pm, Danny to CS VEA, ITMs install stagging.
- 1:30 pm, Apollo crew, removal of BSC1 north door, happen to watch it as the crew was setting it on the floor.
- 1:35 pm, Jim and Jonathan to X-End, fiber work.
- 1:38 pm, Cyrus cdsldap0 reboot, updates.
- 1:45 pm, Filiberto and Aaron to H1 electronics room.
- 3:30 pm, Peter to CS VEA, H2 laser enclosure.
- 3:35 pm, Dan Hoak to CS VEA.
- Vacuum status, vented.
- Apollo done preping cleanroom inside beer garden.
- Cristina, Karen and Cris performing 1st cleaning BSC1 and BSC3 chambers along with the floor and cleanroom.
- Garb for the beer garden needs setup.
- HAM6 cleaning for door removal at a later time, to be discussed.
- Richard, Filiberto and Aaron to address some bug issues with AA/AI chassis.
WP 4635
The fibers connecting the front end computers to the RFM switch have been rearranged at both end stations to be consistent.
For EX:
| Front end | Old RFM port | New RFM port |
|---|---|---|
| h1susex | 1 | 2 |
| h1seiex | 2 | 1 |
| h1iscex | 0 | 0 |
For EY:
| Front end | Old RFM port | New RFM port |
|---|---|---|
| h1susey | 1 | 2 |
| h1seiey | 0 | 1 |
| h1iscey | 2 | 0 |
All connections swapped at the switch.
There was a security advisory for GnuTLS, so I applied the latest updates to cdsldap0 and rebooted it.
I ran OS updates on all the control room workstations today. There is a new kernel, but reboots can be done at any convenient time.
Also, printing from MEDM and DTT should now work; the LPDEST/PSPRINTER environment variables pointed to the wrong name, so they have been updated in the appropriate cdscfg scripts. You may have to log out and log in again for the changes to take effect.
Last week, and similarly as for SR2, B&K hammer measurements were carried out on the HAM5 suspension cages (SRM SR3 and OFI) to test their structural dynamics. The vibration absorbers were ON during the measurements. For each of them, the accelerometer was mounted on the top of one the cage corner, with the accelerometer axis oriented as X = Long, Y = Transverse and Z = Vertical (sus coordinates). Hammer impulse were given in X and Y directions. Pictures attached are showing SR3 and OFI cages with axis labels, accelerometer position and hammer impulse location.
The X/X and Y/Y transfer functions are plotted in the attachments. All cages have well damped resonances below 150Hz, in each of the directions tested.
1) 2014-05-29_H1SR3 : Results are compared with H1 PR3
2) 2014-05-29_H1SRM : Results are compared with H1 HSTS (SR2 MC1 MC3 PRM)
3) 2014-05-29_H1OFI : Results are compared with L1 OFI
Results are saved and commited in the svn under :
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/BandK
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR3/BandK
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OFIS/H1/OFI/BandK
Left to do :
HAM4 : Scraper Baffle
HAM5 : Betsy told me OFI is not in its final position yet so I will take the measurement again for OFI when doors will be open.
HAM6 : OMC
After verifying that there are no local modification to the source files of h1iscex and h1iscey, I did a clean "make" and "make install" on these models and restarted them. This fixed the broken IPC MEDM screen (where it appeared the ISC model was trying to receive its own sending channels) and fixed the 100% IPC errors at the ASC receiver for the LOCKIN_OSCn_CLK channels.
Looking at the time stamps of the files, we suspect the problem appeared due not leaving enough time between the make and make-install steps (possible NFS caching).
Betsy, Sheila, Keita, Arnaud, Thomas
Here is a snap shots of the current alingment offsets. This alingment was checked quickly this morning, both of the arms are flashing green so the ITMs are within a urad or so of alinged.
We noticed that the ailngment of ITMY was off by about 8 urad in pitch from the saved offset, this seems to be because turning on and off the ring heater changes the ailngments. Attached are trends of the OpLevs durring the ring heater stress test this weekend, the itms moved by 2-5 urad in yaw, and both moved by about 30 urad in pitch. The third screenshot shows how the pitch changed as the ring heater power cycled.
@DetChar -- can you grab calibrated ASDs of the optical levers before and after the ring heaters are on full blast? It looks like they not only displace the optic in angle, but also add noise. It would be good to quantify this early, so we can fix it!
I forgot to check this. https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1100184 Phil Willems wrote a document (T1100184) that predicted around 0.9urad of pitch per Watt of RH power. We applied 27W of power, so the Spurious Willems Pitch is around 24urad. This seems consistent with what was seen. It's worth a more detailed look though. I can't explain the 8urad offset between the start and finish.
From Jeff's request I've taken a look at the Oplevs before, during and after the heaters were on and found their ASDs (1st plot). These ADSs are taken over 10 minutes and the times are noted in the legend. I specifically chose times where the ITMY ISI ODC is reporting a good state. In addition the BLRMs look normal and similar for all three times. I also found the ground motion ASDs for these times (2nd plot) to reconfirm the ground motion is similar for all three times. Conclusion - the ASDs for the Oplevs look very similar before, during and after the heaters are on; they don't appear to add extra noise. There is perhaps an extra peak between 7-8Hz in the YAW when the heaters are on but other than that nothing stands out.
There is also a DC power level difference between states before after the weekend stress test. Based on the channel H1:TCS-C_RH_Y_LOWERCURRENT and Aidan's note of 27 W in the ramp up state, the forementioned DC offset correspond to a power level difference of ~8 W (assuming 0.55 for the current level during stress test and 0.3 before the stress test and 0 after the stress test, obtained from the plot of H1:TCS-C_RH_Y_LOWERCURRENT; 27 * 0.3^2/0.55^2). From the dcc documnet noted in the Aidan's comment this correspond to ~8 urd difference we between the initial and end states. This also means that we probably have to make new reference with the current setting (of zero current), if desired.
The ITMY ring heater was set to 8W during the past commissioning period to correct for the fact that we had an ETM with ITM coating installed. This will be changed in the current installation phase. New references will be rquired when we have the new optics installed and aligned.
Also note, the ITMs that this ring heater test was performed on are hung from metal wires in stead of glass fibers. I wonder if this is what is making them more susceptible to steering errors when the ring heater is engaged... The current install is to swap these ITMs out for new units complete with glass fibers. Hopefully the ITMs won't be as susceptible to mispointing when on fibers if this is the case.
J. Kissel As Betsy indicates these ITMs are suspended via steel wire instead of fused silica fiber. This plays a difference in the compliance used in the Phil's calculation of the expected displacement in T1100184. Also, the Willems calculation uses a QUAD suspension model from T1000263 which is an out-dated model parameter set that was never confirmed against real measurements (which we now have). Also it's unclear which Stage / DOF to Stage / DOF was used to produce the "pitch coupling" of 0.154 [rad/Nm]. The mathematica notebook that is "available from the author" is regrettably *not* zipped up in the "Other Files" on the DCC card, so I can't confirm. The attached .pdf doesn't have the 0.154 anywhere in the document. However, assuming the compliance he used was pitch displacement of the test mass from pitch torque on the test mass, the values from the production quad model model (now confirmed against measurement) are Fiber: 0.141 [rad/N.m] (using the quadopt_fiber.m parameter set) Wire: 0.105 [rad/N.m] (using the quadopt_wirerehang.m parameter set) Willems quotes the displacement of the Center of Mass (CoM) as 1.47e-7 [m] for 11 [W] of ring heater power. Assuming the displacement is linear with ring-heater power (safe assumption??), that's 1.34e-8 [rad/W] The displacement one expects per Watt of Ring heater power from the Willems model of a displaced CoM is then Fiber: 1.34e-8 [m/W] * 40 [kg] * 9.8 [m/s^2] * 0.141 [rad/N.m] = 7.4064e-07 [rad/W] = 0.74 [urad/W] Wire: 1.34e-8 [m/W] * 40 [kg] * 9.8 [m/s^2] * 0.105 [rad/N.m] = 5.5154e-07 [rad/W] = 0.55 [urad/W] And therefore at max power of 27 [W], the ITMs should be displaced by Wire: 5.5154e-07 [rad/W] * 27 [W] = 1.4892e-05 [rad] = 15 [urad]. This is a factor of two less than what is seen in ITMX Pitch (the cleanest example). For ITMY, I don't think the test mass was allowed to reach equilibrium before the ring heater's power was changed during the power cycling, so it's more difficult to assess the displacement -- but I think it's much closer to 15 [urad] judging by when the test was turned off (presumably it was turned off to zero current, and not the equivalent of 8 [W] that it had been set to as Daniel indicates).
Jeff pointed out that the factor of two in the ring heater deviation could arise from the optical lever gain in ITMY being a factor of two smaller than ITMX. We trust the ITMX's optical lever calibration because its gain was measured using the baffle PDs and the entire 4km arm (noted in ALOG 10331) but it doesn't look like a similar procedure was done for ITMY, or at least we couldn't find an ALOG that indicated as such.
When the septum was removed, the cabling between HAMs 5 & 6 were disconnected so the crew could deal with all the bolts. I asked FClara to reconnect the cables to the WHAM6 NW feedthru, SUS & ISC I think. I'm not familiar enough to distinguish these so I left those to him. When they are sorted out I will complete the cable/feedthru protecting. Meanwhile, HAM5 ISI sensors are live, don't disconnect any cabling, you'll have to cut zip ties to do so.
Installed SUS and ISC cabling to D3 flange of HAM6 (NW corner). Flange Cable Description D3-1C1 H1:SUS_HAM6-10 OMC TOP D3-1C2 H1:SUS_HAM6-11 OMC Right/Side D3-2C1 H1:ISC_HAM6-265 ASC_AS_A (WFS) D3-2C2 H1:ISC_HAM6-266 ASC_AS_B (WFS) Document D1300122, internal in-vacuum cabling calls out for cable ISC-265 and ISC-266 to be connected to flange D5-3C1 and D5-3C2. Document should be updated. Filiberto Clara
HAM6 NW Cables stress relieved and E-FeedThrus protected.
Dan H. completed setting up of the HAM6 QPD sled yesterday. With he & Keita both happy with the Dan's mode matching measurements, the Sled wrapped up and bagged. Before doing this, positions of optics were measured (with a ruler +/- 1mm). Here are distances measured:
Photos of the HAM6 QPD Sled are located here.
The WFS Sled, QPD Sled, Fast Shutter Beam Dump, and a bag of hardware/dog clamps are all in totes in the Optics Lab and ready to be payloaded on HAM6 (most likely early next week?).
NOTE: Still missing the Fast Shutter! Still being designed/manufactured??
A document describing the mode-matching procedure is in the DCC: T1400370.
After some response from the the Cogs, I finalized the balance, cleaned up some of the SRS cables and other spode. The covers are on and pulled away from the ISI. HEPI remains locked. Purge is turned way down. TFs are underway.
Asbuilt redline added to D1001139-v2 reflecting the change of added balance Mass.
