I noticed that we no longer had a retro-reflected green beam even though we were aligned onto the QPDs. TMSX was as follows: PIT: -103, YAW: -297. In order to get the retro-reflected beam back, I had to move TMSX to: PIT: 13. YAW: -323. I am not sure what would have caused the offset to drift so much. I have turned the clean room fans back ON to see if this caused a drift in anything.

Jim, Cyrus, Dan and Dave

We recompiled all front end models against RCG tag-2.8.2 with the execption of h1susim and h1sushtts which were left back at tag-2.8 (current models do not compile).

We first upgraded h1seib1 and h1asc0 because slow data errors were easily evident in the h1hpiitmy and h1ascimc models (due to EzCa and Phase parts respectively). These systems slow data was found to be correct, so we went ahead and restarted all user models and restarted the DAQ. The h1pemmx system did not restart, even after many attempts. Jim went to MX and power cycled h1pemmx and its chassis, it then restarted correctly but the return timing signal to the MSR master continues to have problems (started 22Nov2013).

Cyrus and Jim revisited MX and found that the return single mode timing line was loose at the IO Chassis timing slave SFP. The fiber was reseated and the return timing diagnostic signal is now good at the MSR master.

We added two new EDCU ini files into the DAQ: H1EDCU_GRD.ini and H1EDCU_PSLCENTROID.ini (Guardian and PSL image centroid channels). I also updated the H1EDCU_ECATX1PLC2.ini file against the latest Beckhoff file.

We reconfigured h1nds0 to serve commissioning frames (it was serving science frames as a check of this frame type). This gives the users full look back over the past weekend when h1fw1 was down due to disk issues.

Dan upgraded the h1ldasgw0 QFS file server. h1fw0 was down for about an hour.

We timed the recover time of the PSL when the h1psl0 models were stopped and restarted. We recovered the reference cavity in a record 2 minutes. Opening the diode room shutter via MEDM posed no problems today.

Attached are plots of dust counts at end Y requested from Dec. 13 20:00 - Dec. 16 20:00 UTC.

We finished welding ETMY on Friday evening. It was hanging with about 5 or 6 mrad of differential pitch wrt the PUM. It was left hanging over the weekend. When we looked at it this morning, two fibres had broken and the other two were lying against one of the earthquake stop rails. All the horns and stock were still intact. We scribed off the stock from all 8 horns and filed them back to 6mm above the ears. Work is ongoing to clean up the remains of the two shattered fibres and to pull enough fibres to allow welding again first thing in the New Year.
Angus, Travis & Betsy

[Arnaud, Kiwamu, Keita]

After HEPI work earlier, BS was restored using oplev.

POP beam yet to be found. PRY alignmnent was restored, PRY was locked, but couldn't see anything on MC tube baffle. Thinking that the beam is already clearing the baffle hole, we went to ISCT1 but couldn't find the beam (actually there was some beam but it didn't move when we misalign ITMY). We might have to go 10W before we can find anything.

PRY alignment is dubious. When PRY locks, the beam look low on BS AND ITMY. When we set the beam height on ITMY using ITMY video image, BS beam position came up and looked OK-ish (maybe still low). However, with this new alignment, we couldn't steer ITMY enough to re-establish the PRY cavity as F3 BOSEM output railed.

PRX scanning efforts.  With PRY path aligned (to dubious alignment) and then ITMY misaligned, we scanned ITMX to see if we can see PRX cavity flash, but we weren't successful. We will set PR3 angle such that the beam hits the center of ITMY and scan ITMX tonight.

ITMX oplev is dubious. When we scanned ITMX, OSEMs (M0, L1 and L2) responded nicely but we got nothing from oplev.

ITMX camera should be zoomed out if possible. We cannot see any beam on the ITMX camera, but it's mostly looking at ITMX face.

Today, I found that we hadn't retored the BS and ITMY HEPIs back to the HIFO alignment. So I restored them back to the position of July 25th.

BS HEPI:

Local sensors needed to be as follows in order to get back to the HIFO alignment:

• H1 = -9000
• H2 = -11650
• H3 = 220
• H4 = 6900
• V1 = -14800
• V2 = -12300
• V3 = -14200
• V4 = -14000

I newly set the Cartesian targets (i.e. H1:HPI-BS_IPS_X_TARGET  and etc.) to be:

• X = 127911.0
• Y = 380717.0
• Z = -536093.0
• RX = 15438.9
• RY = 32281.4
• RZ = 7990.8
• HP = -524654.0
• VP = 104698.0

ITMY HEPI:

Local sensors needed to be:

• H1 = 15
• H2 = 25
• H3 = -30
• H4 = -50
• V1 = 85
• V2 = 60
• V3 = 120
• V4 = 20

I newly set the Cartesian targets to be:

• X = -205.7
• Y = -822.6
• Z = 2762.9
• RX = 33.5
• RY = 502.2
• RZ = -47.3
• HP = -1551.1
• VP = -4847.1

In preparation for tomorrows RCG upgrade from tag-2.8 to tag-2.8.2 I have created a build area for tag-2.8.2. All release pointers now refer to 2.8.2.

I have pre-compiled all user models against tag-2.8.2. All models compiled except for h1susim and h1sushtts, which were expected to fail. These two systems will stay back at 2.8.

I ran the systems through my slow channel configuration checker script (/opt/rtcds/userapps/release/cds/common/scripts/slow_chan_config_checker.py) and they all passed. This means there no mismatches between the slow channel order defined on the front end and that used by the DAQ via the model's INI file.

Tomorrow morning we will do the final make-install and restart all models. (h1susim and h1sushtts will be restarted but will run the 2.8 code).

This will give us another data point in how quickly the PSL recovers from a front end shutdown.

The test over the weekend of turning off the cleanroom after running the ALS alignment servos for a while is kind of inconclusive.  the attached plot shows PZT outputs over the weekend.  The red arrow indicates the time when the cleanroom was turned off, you can see a small blip in the alignment servos, but it is small compared to the normal drift in the servos.  However, the plots attached to alog https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=7146 show similar drifts in the PZT aligment, even before the cleanroom was turned off.

One problem with the test we just did is that the green wasn't on the PD when we started, we can try this again after realigning if we need to.

Kyle opened GV1 (WP 4344)
Sheila removed two beamsplitters from the H1 PSL table
Thomas and Kiwamu aligned the optical levers at ITMX and ITMY
Dust monitor 9 dropping in and out of communication

09:09 Filiberto installing analog camera for ITMX (WP 4343)
10:10 Corey to end X to add sign to lab door
10:10 Jim B. labeling IO chassis in CER
10:25 Jim B., Jeff K. restarting h1seih23 models and IOP
11:33 Kyle done opening GV1
12:02 cardboard container pickup
12:43 Filiberto, Louis cleaning up cabling by HAM 4
13:03 - 13:09 Jim B. labeling cables for h1seib3
13:21 Jeff B. and Andres looking for parts near the LVEA test stand
13:40 Richard to end X to look at pressure gauge
13:56 cardboard container dropoff
14:12 Jeff B. and Andres done
15:13 Corey to squeezer bay to put away parts

Tom V. and others needed GV1 open -> New combined volume pumped only by XBM turbo -> GV5 left soft-closed -> Demonstrated XBM turbo safety valve closes when foreline measured value is above setpoint

KiwamuI, ThomasV

We aligned ITMX and ITMY optical levers to the position of the test masses at approximately 2013-12-16 12:00 PT. We may need to adjust the alignment if the pointing changes due to commissioning activities. 

We've been pumping on the vacuum jacket of the CP3 LN2 dewar. This morning the pressures are 2.8 e-3 torr at the scroll pump inlet and 7 microns at the TC gauge. Back in November the pressure was ~700 microns at the TC gauge.

I changed the IMC locking thresholds because the incident laser power was increased from 300 mW to 1W.

• Boost trigger was increased from 200 to 800 counts.
• The LSC low pass filter trigger was increased to 3000 counts.

It's locking fine.
 

After an initial assessment that stated "not too bad, not too good" (https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=8919), which was based on just two data points (beam radius on WFSs), I added the third point further downstream of the WFS2 and it turns out that actually it's excellent.

In the attached plot, blue circles represent the measured beam width, blue crosses on both sides of blue circle represent the potential position error (Jamie claims +-1cm though probably it's too generous), red line is a fit over the three points, green is the curve generated by the design parameters.

As you can see, in both horizontal and vertical direction, the waist is very close to the middle of the WFSs, and the waist radius is very close to the designed 250um.  Gouy separation for X (horizontal) and Y (vertical) are 82.6 and 87.1 degrees, respectively.

This was obtained from just two iterations of measurming at WFS1 and WFS2 and pushing RM2 toward RM1 based on the measurement. Downstream was measured just once after we were satisfied with WFS1 and WFS2.

Distance from RM3 to the first lens on the sled is, according to Jamie, between 48.0 and 48.25 inches.

Also, as noted earlier, the above data was obtained after having moved RM2 toward RM1 by 22.5mm. Everything else is the same as what Sheila reported much earlier.

We also measured at one point between RM3 and the sled (14.5" downstream of RM3).  Together with upstream number measured yesterday (https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=8893), these are:

In all of the above measurements, "Profile averages" was 10, "Rolling profile Averages" was 3, the actual number of measuremets (i.e. the number of scans performed before I stopped the measurement) were larger than 10 but I don't know if the software was taking more than 10 points into the statistics or not.