The contractor is on site to sweep the gravel and rocks off of the access roads at each arm. The sweeper machine moves at a very slow pace so please be aware of this when traveling up and down the arms.
I've collected transfer functions for all optics and all DOFs in HAM6. Everything looks good and we should pump down. A subset of the results, for OMCS L and OM1,2,3 P are attached; the xml files have been saved and committed to the SUS SVN.
A report on the performance of the seismic isolation subsystem during ER7 at both sites has been compiled on the DCC: G1500811
Summary:
ER7-driven requests from DetChar for the SEI team:
To test if NDS clients after tomorrow will correctly apply the upcoming leap second, I injected a sub-second signal into a DAQ DQ channel today. The H1:PEM-EX_ADC_0_08_OUT_DQ channel is a PEM test channel with ADC bit noise on its input. I ran awgstream to inject a signal which is one second long, and all zero except for 1/16th of a second starting at the 0.5S mark. This 1/16th second block is a step function, with an amplitude of 1000 counts.
The time of injection is chosen to be modulo 64 in GPS time, so it will be the first second of a 64second DAQ frame. The time of injection is
| GPS | 1119659968 |
| PDT | Jun 29 2015 17:39:12 |
| UTC | Jun 30 2015 00:39:12 |
The model runs at 16kHz, this channel is acquired to the DAQ at 2048Hz. The decimation filter is producing the ringing seen at the step transitions.
Gerardo, Bubba, Kyle Installed HAM6 East and South Doors ***Noticed many scratches on HAM6 East Door chamber flange - yes, where the door O-rings contact -> This is due to the fact that spring clamps have been used to secure the soft-covers to prevent the purge-air from blowing them off as is the norm but, unlike the normal case, for this flange, the O-rings are located in grooves on the door instead of the chamber. As such, the O-ring protectors are on the door and not the chamber. So, the spring clamps clamp against the machined sealing surface of the chamber flange and only the C3 fabric acts as a barrier between the steel clamps and the steel flange and scratching is inevitable. Let us not do this again! In the future, O-ring protectors should be installed on the chamber flange in addition to the door flange for this special case. Kyle, Gerardo Connected pump carts to HAM5 and HAM6 annulus pump ports -> Began pumping annuli(?) -> Will pump HAM6 tomorrow.
I repeated the charge measurements on both ETMX and ETMY. Plots are attached.
I was working on FF on HAM2 and when I looked at HAM3 for comparison, I saw that the GS-13's have a 23 hz comb. My first thought was some vacuum component, but Kyle says he doesn't have anything running in the area. Near as I can tell it starts at about 9 am local on Friday. Unsure of the cause, but I need to run. I'll look some more tomorrow.
I was out last week but Gerardo did start a pump cart on Friday at the Diagonal OMC tube. Time? -> He shut it down this afternoon.
LVEA: Laser Safe Observation Bit: Commissioning 07:15 S&K Electric – Running conduit on Y-Arm near end station 08:35 Christina & Karen – Cleaning in LVEA 09:07 Jodi – Going to End-Y and End-X to check property tags 09:10 Bubba – Going to End-X – Will be in VEA and mechanical room 09:43 Richard – Going to End-Y to check on electrical work 10:17 Hugh & Jeff B. – Going to HAM6 for CC closeout tasks 10:23 Jason & Ed – Going to End-X to adjust OpLev laser 10:23 Jim – Going to HAM5 to check for rubbing 10:32 Richard – Back from End-Y 10:52 Jason & Ed – Back from End-X 11:00 Jodi – Back from end stations 11:05 Corey – Going to HAM6 to take photographs 11:12 Corey – Out of LVEA 11:19 Christina & Karen – Cleaning at End-Y 11:24 Hugh & Jeff – Out of LVEA 11:54 Christina & Karen – Cleaning at End-X 12:34 Jim – FF testing on HAM2 12:35 Christina & Karen – finished at End-X 12:36 Hanford alarm testing 13:25 Gerardo – Going to HAM6 to prep for door install 13:43 S&K Electric – Out of Y-Arm beam tube – Electrical work at End-Y 13:45 Door crew at HAM6 14:27 Filiberto – In LVEA near X-Arm to stage for vacuum Beckhoff work 15:06 Brutzman’s on site to finish cubical installation 15:20 S&K Electric – Out of End-Y 15:27 Jeff – Going into CER 15:45 Door crew finished at HAM6 15:57 Kyle – Going to End-X to recover parts and equipment
PSL Status: SysStat: All Green, except VB program offline & LRA out of range ** Output power: 32.9w Frontend Watch: Green HPO Watch: Red PMC: Locked: 6 days, 2 hours, 22 minutes Reflected power: 2.6w Transmitted power: 23.1w Total Power: 25.7w ISS: Diffracted power: 5.6% Last saturation event: 0 days, 4 hours, 44 minutes FSS: Locked: 6 days, 2 hours, 21 minutes Trans PD: 1.190v ** The Crystal chiller had a low water alarm. I added 400ml of water.
SEI: HAM6 close out and door install Looking into some issues with HAM5 Running FF testing on HAM2 SUS: ETM charge levels are still good. They will be monitored to see if they return Investigating 2 BOSEMs on TMS-X which are not responsive CDS: Working on mods to Beckhoff chassis in corner station NOTES: There will be an Internet access outage on Tuesday from 09:00 to 10:00 Stripe Rite will be on site Tuesday to sweep along the X and Y beam tubes
While following up some hVeto results, I came across some very strange signal in ISI-HAM4_BLND_GS13Y. It's also in X and Z - I haven't checked other degrees of freedom or the raw GS13 signals. For several days, there's a sweep from ~700 Hz to 1024 (Nyquist) once per second. It doesn't seem to be quite aligned with the second. The first plot is an Omega scan that shows what it looks like. The second plot shows the onset at June 9 16:49:54 UTC. The only thing I can find in the log is a restart of h1susb123 at 11:50 local (alog). I think this channel is SEI not SUS but maybe they share a front-end machine? The problem looks to be continuous until about June 13 21:30 UTC, third plot. I don't know what fixed it. There's more digging in we can do if needed. This is not a huge problem for detchar, the sudden change in the channel just caused some weird results in hVeto. We probably should be ignoring the high-frequency part of the signal anyway.
Leonid.Prokhorov, Jeffrey.Kissel We repeated the charge measurements on both ETMX and ETMY. Results are close to yesterday's one. Plots of all measured data after discharging are attached. In the morning we found both ESD drivers off and reset it (see alog 19341). Today we have the scattering of data points for ETMY lower than yesterday with unknown reason. We presumed that it may be due to the optical levers centering and check the alighnment at last 3 days. for ETMY: Alignment was not very good today 0..-6(pitch) and -1..-2.5 (yaw), while there is the minimal scattering. The better alignment was at June, 24: -0.5..0.2 (pitch) and 0..0.3(yaw), when we have larger scattering. for ETMX: Scattering seems more or less the same for all days, while OPLEV centering is really different (+6(pitch) and -10(yaw) at June, 24; -1(pitch) and 0..-0.2(yaw) at June, 25; 0.5..2(pitch) and -0.4..0.2(yaw) at June, 26) So it seems like there is no correlation between alignment of optical levers and scattering of measured charge. Sign of the pitch and yaw response on excitation with different bias voltage for ETMY was the same as in yesterday measurements, see plot.
Ring Heater screen
Ops Overview:
Bubba Gerardo We moved 3 clean rooms, several tables, and miscellaneous items left in clean rooms and on tables from HAM 6 area to a location in front of the Hi-Bay. We now have access for the east door to be installed and with a few strategic crane/fork lift moves, the south door will be ready to install. The garbing room remains powered up and in the same position as this week until the south door is ready for install, therefore travel on the south side of H-1 output is still restricted.
I noticed this morning (through the Detchar pages, very sad that last nights SEI data isn't available) that the HAM5 ISI has not been doing well since about the time HAM6 vent activities started. Sadly this casts some doubt on the feedforward data I posted the other day, so I re-evaluated the performance at HAM4 while I was digging into HAM5. My first image shows the difference between HAM's 4 & 5 in the Y direction, all the other DOFs look similar. Second image shows the rotational dof's of HEPI L4C's on the two chambers, and HAM5 sees al lot more motion than HAM4 (dashed lines are HAM5, solid are HAM4). The translations are messier, (third image) but still seem to indicate more motion at HAM5. Hugh reports finding a few mechanical contacts at the chamber while he was working on HAM6, so I'll wait to panic about HAM5 until after that mess is cleaned up. Jeff is filing a report with FRS on this.
On to doing a better evaluation of RY feedforward on HAM'S : the fourth image shows the healthy HAM4 RY feed forward, dashed lines are off, solid are on. Fifth image shows that turning RY FF on has not spoiled the X performance.
Last two images show HAM4's Y and Z feedforward performance, with the same dashed/solid off/on convention.
Opened FRS ticket #3240.
Keep in mind that the mechanical loads on the HAM6/HAM5 vacuum chambers have drastically changed. Prior to the vent HAM6 was supporting the 42000 pound atmospheric load applied at the East door but now this load is applied at the septum plate. The septum is bolted hard to HAM5 and coupled to HAM6 through a bellows so this load is now applied to HAM5. I don't know what impact this might have on the ISI but the reactions from the floor have certainly moved. Perhaps local tilt has changed?
Matt H, Bubba G, Greg G, Jeff B, Calum T (remotely), Eddie Sanchez (remotely)
If you remember from yesterday with all the glass pieces of the OMC shroud in we had a cable interference with the shroud (see pic 2424).
After playing with the cables the decision was made to pull the two interfering panels out so that the cables would hang free (see pic 2431). This however leaves the to now open and exposed (pic 2459). So after some discussion last night we decided to try to score and snap part of the black glass to stop the interference but also so that we could get the plate back in.
By looking side on (pic 2469) we could use the holes that the capture screws go in a s a guide to where the cables interfere with the black glass and how much glass we wanted to remove.
We decided to remove around 2.25 " (see plate mod pdf)...so it should hopefully look like "OMC3D" pic
With a brand new glass cutter we practiced on some test piece bits of black glass Calum had sent Betsy. The trick is to only do one 'score" with a light but even pressure, and then put the pressure over a raised surface (say a small diameter smooth rod), and then with gentle and even pressure that is spread out, push down and will get it to snap along the score.
Once happy with our technique, we went out and did it to the two real pieces. After of course the old carpenters trick of "measuring twice cutting once" :-) Worked like a charm. John W, gave us a small file (diamond tipped I think) to just gently bevel the edges a tiny bit to take off the sharp corners. That also worked really well. We then cleaned it by blowing it down with top gun, and then in area that snapped giving it a methanol rinse.
It went back in no problems at all. Its done.
Pic 2497.....before pic of one of the glass pieces to be cut
Pic 2498......after its been "modified"
Pic 2504...drying after methanol rinse. Thats the AR coated side you see
Pic 2506 & 2510.....The now complete OMC black glass shroud installed
It was a nice recovery!
It seems that the picture 2506 shows that one of the bosem cables was touching these two white cables.
It's not obvious from the picture 2510. Has this rubbing been fixed between these two pictures?
Ahh, I meant to double-check this clearance - thanks for the reminder. I just went back into the chamber, there was no contact between the white (PZT?) cables and the black BOSEM cable, but I fiddled with the BOSEM cable to provide more clearance. The attached pictures aren't terribly convincing by there's more than an centimeter of room between the cables now.
Filiberto, Patrick I didn't realized it had been removed, and except for communication errors with the missing chassis, the PLCs ran on without apparent incident. Filiberto made the same modifications as to the one at end X and reinstalled it. I updated the system manager accordingly, checked it into svn and activated it. This time I didn't restart the PLCs, but I still had to restart the EPICS IOC. I burtrestored to 6:10 this morning.
Both End Station Controls Chassis 3 were updated to wiring diagram E1400317-v2. The following beckhoff modules were installed: QTY 6 : EL3104 Analog Input Terminals QTY 1: EL9410 Power Supply Terminal for E-Bus New modules inferface with ALS WFS Demodulators and MCL PZTs.
In an email conversation Norna had asked what we could do to reduce motion on the HAM's in the RX/RY dofs at 25-35 hz. This morning I took a few measurements to design a FF filter. I've taken a first pass at it and I think I have something that works. Attached spectra are of the ground STS X and GS13s in RY the first png, then both sensors in X on the second plot. The live measurements are with FF on, references are from a quiet time last night, FF off.
The third attachment is a plot from the script I used to do the filter fit. Blue is the filter, green is the ideal fit from the St0 L4C's to the ISI GS13's, red is the fit from the HEPI L4C's to the ISI. The design approach is exactly the same as I talked about in my alog 18045.
I also have Y and Z feedforward working on the SRC HAMs. I attach performance plots (taken at the same time as the plots from my main post). These have been running on HAM4 for a little while (sometime after ER7 ended), but I never got around to doing the alog and I was a little more organized when I installed them on HAM5 today. First plot is Y, second is Z. Active measurement is with FF on, reference is FF off. Again, we really need a cavity to say if these are good enough, but I leave them running for now.
I've looked at X, RX and RZ, but RX and RZ show low coherence and X looks... messy, see last plot.
That was quick! Looking good. Thanks.
J. Kissel, J. Warner Some additional information and/or a "current status:" ISIs HAM2 and HAM3 do not have any ST0 / HEPI L4C feed-forward running. ISIs HAM4 and HAM5 have Y, Z, and RY ST0 L4C (not HEPI L4C) feed-forward running. (HAM6 is currently vented and the ISI and HEPI are locked.) The HAM4 and HAM5 filters, for Y, Z, and RY live in FMs 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The gain for all DOFs on both HAMs is 0.5. Norna's designing / modelling how adding blades between the HSTS's lowest stages will improve performance in the SUS's vertical displacement. The input motion for the SUS's suspension point in vertical is composed of the ISI's center of mass moving in Z, RX, and RY (see T1100617). She noticed from the results Jim posted (T1500289), that at 25-30 [Hz], the input V motion was dominated by RX / RY of the table. So, among other ways to improve the performance at these frequencies (see them discussed in SWG aLOG 11327), Jim tried improving the RY DOFs today -- and won! Nice work, as always, Jim!
There was a problem with HAM5 at the time I took this data. I've taken new measurements from HAM4, see alog 19343. Conclusions remains the same, I think, but the data is cleaner.