Evan, Sheila, Koji

We ran into some difficulty tonight with HAM3 seismic, both HEPI and the ISI are tripping.  We've tried several things:

• disabled ISC outputs, the IMC-MCL output, and the isc inputs to MC2. There were no signals going to PR2. 
• turned off all ISI sensor correction by setting gains to 0 in the MATCH filter banks
• The HPI sensor correction was off already
• things still tripped, so we switched the GS13s to low gain mode.  
• It seems that if we leave HEPI tripped and isolate the ISI, it stays isolated without tripping, so HEPI must be the problem.  We looked at the pump servo screen but nothing seems obviously wrong....

This is a follow up entry of LHO ALOG 17601.

A couple of days ago, the discrepancy of the response for DCPDA and DCPDB were found. This was basically caused by misadjusted filter modules for the anti-whitening filters. Some of them were using design values (like Z10:P1) and some others were just left as they had been imported from the LLO setup.

In order to correctly take the whitening transfer functions into account, the wiring of the in-vacuum and in-air connections were necessary to be tracked down. The 1st attachment shows the sufficiently detailed wiring chain for this task. Using the test data (links indicated in the diagram), we can reconstruct what the correct anti-whitening filters should be. The summary can be found below.

[Trivia for Rich: DCPD1 (Transmission side of the OMC BS) is connected to HEAD2, and DCPD2 (Relfection side of the OMC BS) is connected to HEAD1. This is because of twisted D1300369. This cable has J2 for HEAD2 and J3 for HEAD1. This twist exists in LLO and LHO consistently, as far as I know]

=======
Characteristics of the DCPD electronics chain
Complex poles/zeros are expressed by f0 and Q

DCPD A
(DCPD at the transmission side of the OMC DCPD BS)
- Preamp D060572 SN005
Transimpedance: Z_LO = 100.2, Z_HI = 400.0
Voltage amplification ZPK: zeros: 7.094, 7.094, (204.44 k, 0.426), poles: 73.131, 83.167, 13.71k, 17.80k, gain: 1.984

- Whitening filter D1002559 S1101603
(This document defines the gain not at the DC but at a high frequency. The gain below is defined as a DC gain.)
CH5 Whitening
Filter 1: zero 0.87, pole 10.07, DC gain 10.36/(10.07/0.87)
Filter 2: zero 0.88, pole 10.15, DC gain 10.36/(10.15/0.88)
Filter 3: zero 0.88, pole 10.20, DC gain 10.36/(10.20/0.88)
Gain: “0dB”: -0.051dB (nominal), “3dB”: 2.944dB, “6dB”: 5.963dB, “12dB”: 11.84dB, “24dB”: 24.04dB

DCPD B
(DCPD at the reflection side of the OMC DCPD BS)
- Preamp D060572 SN004
Transimpedance: Z_LO = 100.8, Z_HI = 400.9
Voltage amplification ZPK: zeros: 7.689, 7.689, (203.90 k, 0.429), poles: 78.912, 90.642, 13.69k, 17.80k, gain: 1.983

- Whitening filter D1002559 S1101603
CH6 Whitening
Filter 1: zero 0.88, pole 10.13, DC gain 10.41/(10.13/0.88)
Filter 2: zero 0.87, pole   9.96, DC gain 10.40/(  9.96/0.87)
Filter 3: zero 0.88, pole 10.15, DC gain 10.41/(10.15/0.88)
Gain: “0dB”: -0.012dB (nominal), “3dB”: 2.982dB, “6dB”: 6.007dB, “12dB”: 11.87dB, “24dB”: 24.04dB

=======

Now we put these transfer functions into the model and check if we can reproduce the observed relative difference (Attachment 2). In deed, the measurement is well explained by the model below 30Hz where the measurement S/N was good. As we saw in the previous entry, the difference of the DCPDA and DCPDB after the whtening compensation is 20% max. Note that further inspection revealed that this 20% difference is, in fact, mostly coming from the difference of the preamp transfer functions rather than the miscompensation.

So this was the relative calibration between DCPDA and DCPDB. How is the compensation performance of each one? The 3rd attachment shows how much of current we get at the output as H1:OMC-DCPD_A_OUT, H1:OMC-DCPD_B_OUT, and H1:OMC-DCPD_SUM_OUT, if we give 1mA of photocurrent to DCPD_A, DCPD_B, or both (half and half). Ideally, this should be the unity. The plot shows how they have not been adjusted. For the our main GW channel we take sum of two DCPDs. The individual deviations were averaged and thus the sum channel has max 10% deviation from the ideal compensation. This shows up in the GW channel.

=======

So let’s implement correct compensation. Basically we can place the inverse filter of the each filters. The preamplifier, however, includes some poles and zeros whose frequency are higher than the nyquist frequency. Here we just ignore them and assess how the impact is.

The result is shown as the 4th attachment. Upto 1kHz, the gain error is less than 1%. This increases to 5% above 3kHz.  The phase error is 7deg at 1kHz. This increases to 20deg above 3kHz. These are the effect of the ignored pole/zeros. Note that these are static error. In fact, the phase error is quite linear to the frequency. Thus this behaves as a time delay of ~18.5us. Since the phase delay at 100Hz is small, the impact to the DARM feedback servo is minimal. For the feedforward subtraction, however, this might cause some limitation of the subtraction performance. In practice, we measure the coupling transfer function in order to adjust the subtraction, in any case. Therefore this delay would not be a serious problem.

The filter bank to implement the new compensation was already configured. The filter file is attached as foton_DCPDfilters.txt.

Sheila, Elli

We tried to move ASC inputs to MICH and SRC1 from AS_B_RF36 to AS_A_RF36 as outlined in Sheila's alog 17623.  We are trying to use ASC-AS_A_RF36_I to control the SRM using SRC1 and ASC-AS_B_RF36_Q to control the BS using MICH.

Today we tried to rephase the AS_B WFS to minimise the effect of SRM misalignment in the Q phase.  Yesterday we tried this by injecting a 12Hz pitch signal into the SRM and minimising the 12Hz line in the ASC-AS_A_RF36_[Q1/Q2/Q3/Q4]_ERR for each of the four quadrants (Q1/Q2/Q3/Q4).  Today we tried a similar thing, except we excited both pitch and yaw on SUS-SRM_M3_LOCK_Y_EXC and SUS-SRM_M3_LOCK_P_EXC at 10 and 12 Hz respectively.  We tried to set the phase of each AS_A_RF36 quadrant to minimise the 10Hz and 12Hz lines simultaneously.  We changed Q1 from -50 to -40, Q2 from -90 to -70, Q3 from -60 to -50, and Q4 from -50 to -20.  It looked like we ended up with smaller signals in the Q-quadrature than we started with.

We also reset the dark offsets on AS_A_RF36.  We unlocked the IMC to do this.

After rephasing AS_A_RF36 and rezoeroing the dark offset, we went to DRMI_LOCKED on ISC_LOCK, and looked for the zero crossing of the AS_A_RF36.  We did this by turning of either MICH or SRC1 ASC and then we changed the BS/SRM alignment and looked for a zero crossing in the relevant AS_A_RF36 signal.  This did not look promising, and we couldn't find a zero crossing at a good alignment for any degree of freedom except for SRM pitch/AS_A_RF36_I_YAW. 

With that we are leaving this task for today, untill we think of a smarter way to rephase the AS_A_RF36.

This morning I moved ITMX pit by -3.8 urad to get more recycling gain. The recycling gain increased from 26 to 30. Assuming that the ASC loops (DHARD and CHARD) suppressed the angle of the misalignment but not the translation, I must have introduced a translation of 7.4 mm upward. In addition, when I increased the PSL power from 3 to 10 W in the full lock, I saw that both ITMs tilted only in pitch by roughly +0.5 urad according to the oplev signals. This means that the beam on ITMs were lower than the center of the optic by roughly 5 mm (see Evan's calculation in alog 16344), though, to be accurate, one has to take the ASC loops into account which I did not. Anyways, I believe that my move on ITMX also improved the centering on ITMX as well. We should check the optical torque when the interferometer is fully locked.

I updated the green camera reference position of ITMs from 241.6 to 248.5 and from 216.5 to 218.0 for ITMX and ITMY respectively. After a lockloss by accident, we confirmed that we could lock back to this new high recycling gain point without re-tuning the ITMX angle. I could not finish optimizing the angle of ITMX or check the yaw alignment yet due to the lock loss. We know that we can get a recycling gain of 33 (alog 17158), so this work continues.

827 Jim W., Krishna - to EX for BRS restart and CPS check

832 Betsy - Retrieving item from W. Bay

842 Betsy - Back

911 Jim W., Krishna - Back

1241 Karen/Cris - To Mid Y/X

1330 Karen - Back

1501 Jeff B. - Cleaning area for vent prep

1536 Jeff B. - Back

J. Kissel, S. Dwyer, K. Venkateswara, J. Warner, T. Shaffer

I stumbled in on a conversation between the four listed above about how to deal with wind, so I immediately started taking notes. Here're some of the conclusions:

- There are *three* fault conditions of the beam rotation sensor (BRS) at EX. Under these conditions the BRS should *not* be used for sensor correction:
   (1) The BRS software is dead. In this case, the raw time series of the ADC input for the sensor has flatlined and does not show the usual ~8 [mHz] sine wave resonance of the beam's suspension.
   (2) The BRS has rung up. If the raw input shows the 8 [mHz] resonance, but the amplitude exceeds ~200 [ct] then the sensor output begins to go non-linear and should not be used. Note that the analog USB DAC that is pushing the analysis software's output into the CDS system is the limit on the signal. This is why, last week, we were seeing what looked like an 8 [mHz] square wave in the time series -- the rotation sensor was so rung up, that the software's requested output signal exceeded the 20 [Vpp] (+/-10 [Vp]) range of the USB DAC. This occurs at +/-16k [ct] in the CDS ADC.
   (3) The BRS's gravitational damper is on. If the gravitational damper is ON, then the BRS has rung up enough that (2) is happening.

- If none of the above error conditions are present, then the BRS can be used to subtract tilt from the GND T240 sitting next to it, and therefore can improve sensor correction. HOWEVER, it won't improve any-and-all sensor correction: the sensor correction filters need to have authority in the frequency region where we expect the GND instrument is dominated by tilt. Therefore, in the current nominal configuration of the BSC-ISIs at LHO -- where we're using Dr. DeRosa's notch-like sensor correction filter that only has authority in a narrow band around 0.5 [Hz] and otherwise using the ISI T240s in feed back down to 45 [mHz] -- improving the GND T240 sensor with the BRS  won't do you any good, because the GND T240 is typically only dominated by tilt only below 90 [mHz].

- Krishna's data from LHO aLOG 16465 demonstrates that even during 5-10 [mph] winds, the following configuration for the ETMX BSC-ISI is equivalent to the nominal configuration:
   (1) Push the blend up to using the 90 [mHz] blends on the X DOF only.
   (2) Use the tilt-corrected GND T240 + BRS super sensor
   (3) Switch to using the Mittleman, low-frequency, "tilt free" sensor correction filters which have authority down to 10 [mHz]
As such, we suggest that this should be the windy configuration for ETMX.

- Jim plans to accelerate his campaign to get the tuned sensor correction MATCH gains pushed into filter banks, such that the nominal value for the *actual* gain of the MATCH bank is 1.0

- T.J. Is going to write us the beginnings of an ISI Configuration manager in order to make it easier to remember all of this.
It will do the following
   To go to windy configuration (in order):
   (1) Switch ETMX ST1 X and ETMY ST1 Y blends from 45 [mHz] to 90 [mHz] (wait to finish)
   (2) Ramp OFF the gain (ramp to zero) of the ETMX Sensor Correction MATCH bank.
   (3) Switch ETMX GND STS X direction input matrix element from using STSB to STSC (i.e. turn ON the BRS correction)
   (4) Switch the ETMX ST1 X Sensor Correction filter from the "SC-rdr" (i.e. the 0.5 [Hz] notch-style DeRosa filter) to the "Mitt_SC" (i.e. the Mittleman, low-frequency filter)
   (5) Wait for the ETMX ST1 X output to settle (which should be the impulse response time of the Mitt_SC filter, ~100 [sec]) -- should be 100 [sec]
   (6) Ramp ON the gain (ramp to one) of the ETMX ST1 X sensor correction MATCH bank.

   To come back from windy configuration (in order):
   (1) Ramp OFF the gain (ramp to zero) of the ETMX ST1 X sensor correction MATCH bank
   (2) Switch the ETMX ST1 X Sensor Correction filter from "Mitt_SC" back to the "SC-rdr"
   (3) Switch ETMX GND STS X direction input matrix element from using STSC to STSB (i.e. turn OFF the BRS correction)
   (4) Wait for the ETMX ST1 X output to settle (the SC-rdr filter's impulse response is smaller and shorter, so maybe ~30 [sec] is fine)
   (5) Ramp ON the gain (ramp to one) of the ETMX ST1 X sensor correction MATCH bank.
   (6) Switch ETMX ST1 X and ETMY ST1 Y blends from 90 [mHz] to 45 [mHz] (wait to finish)
   
This above process assumes that the MATCH TRAMP time has been set to 15 [sec] and is monitored by the SDF system, that Jim has moved the Mitt_SC filter into the MATCH bank (and removed it from the IIR SC bank) and has moved the tuned match gains into filters.

----------
For a description of the Derosa 0.5 [Hz] notch-like sensor correction, see SEI aLOG 645.
For plots and design of the Mittleman low-frequency, tilt-free, (typically used in Z) sensor correction filter, see SEI aLOG 594

Posted are the OpLev trends for the past 7 days. No apparent concerning trends noted. These trends are consistent with 30 and 60 day trends.   

Nutsinee, Dan, Jeff K, Angus

This is a follow up on the alog17529. Below you'll find the list of violin mode frequencies we found and averaged frequencies including possible alternatives. The fiber is determined using data gathered in alog16614 (which cites alog11184, alog9359, alog11044, and alog6858). The air frequency included in the last column. 

The way alternatives work is that, if you choose to use one, you have to use the next alternative as well. For instant, if you decide for 508.00075 line to be averaged violin mode for the ETMY FR, you have to use 508.176 as the ETMY FL line. Or if you were to pick 508.21725 as the ETMY FL, you have to use 508.213 as the ETMY BL. This seems a little bit confusing so I attached the original Excel file as well. 

Any comments, questions, and suggestions welcome.

Ps. I don't know why alog keeps making new entries everytime I add things to the table and update the file. Sorry for the spam!

Jim, Krishna,

After the troubles described in alog 17386, BRS was turned off to allow it to damp down naturally. This morning Jim and I restarted the BRS as attempted earlier in 17309. This time, the amplitude of the balance was low enough and we simply had to reposition the damper and start the software. Everything worked as designed. The attached plot shows the damping of the beam-balance.

After things had settled down I checked the spectra of the signals coming out of BRS and the tilt-subtracted super-sensor and everything looks normal. Wind speeds were at 0-10 mph and the subtraction looked good as seen in the attached pdf. The first plot shows the ground T240 X motion, the BRS_RY ( * w^2/g), ST1 T240 X and the super-sensor. The next plot shows coherences between these sensors.

model restarts logged for Sat 28/Mar/2015
2015_03_28 18:46 h1fw0

one unexpected restart.

model restarts logged for Sun 29/Mar/2015

no restarts reported

model restarts logged for Mon 30/Mar/2015
2015_03_30 15:43 h1fw0
2015_03_30 19:47 h1fw0
2015_03_30 22:28 h1fw1

three unexpected restarts

model restarts logged for Tue 31/Mar/2015
2015_03_31 10:04 h1iopsusex
2015_03_31 10:11 h1iopsusex
2015_03_31 10:14 h1iopsusex
2015_03_31 10:18 h1susetmx
2015_03_31 10:18 h1sustmsx
2015_03_31 10:37 h1iopsusex
2015_03_31 10:37 h1susetmx
2015_03_31 10:37 h1sustmsx
2015_03_31 10:42 h1iopsusey
2015_03_31 10:46 h1susetmy
2015_03_31 10:46 h1sustmsy
2015_03_31 11:07 h1calcs
2015_03_31 11:12 h1iopsusauxex
2015_03_31 11:12 h1susauxex
2015_03_31 11:16 h1iopsusauxex
2015_03_31 11:17 h1susauxex
2015_03_31 11:19 h1iopsusex
2015_03_31 11:20 h1iopsusex
2015_03_31 11:21 h1susetmx
2015_03_31 11:21 h1sustmsx
2015_03_31 11:43 h1iopsusauxey
2015_03_31 11:43 h1susauxey
2015_03_31 11:47 h1iopsusey
2015_03_31 11:47 h1susetmy
2015_03_31 11:47 h1sustmsy
2015_03_31 11:48 h1susetmy
2015_03_31 11:54 h1iopsusb123
2015_03_31 11:57 h1pemcs
2015_03_31 11:57 h1susitmy
2015_03_31 11:59 h1pemex
2015_03_31 11:59 h1pemey
2015_03_31 11:59 h1susbs
2015_03_31 11:59 h1susitmx
2015_03_31 12:24 h1broadcast0
2015_03_31 12:24 h1dc0
2015_03_31 12:24 h1fw0
2015_03_31 12:24 h1fw1
2015_03_31 12:24 h1nds0
2015_03_31 12:24 h1nds1
2015_03_31 12:26 h1pemex
2015_03_31 12:26 h1pemey
2015_03_31 21:43 h1nds1

one unexpected restart. Maintenance day, SUS, CAL and PEM model changes with associated DAQ restart.

model restarts logged for Wed 01/Apr/2015
2015_04_01 06:43 h1fw0
2015_04_01 09:11 h1susitmx
2015_04_01 09:16 h1susitmy
2015_04_01 09:29 h1broadcast0
2015_04_01 09:29 h1dc0
2015_04_01 09:29 h1fw0
2015_04_01 09:29 h1fw1
2015_04_01 09:29 h1nds0
2015_04_01 09:29 h1nds1
2015_04_01 12:07 h1broadcast0
2015_04_01 22:43 h1fw0

two unexpected restarts. Continuation of SUS work with associated DAQ restart. DMT reconfiguration of DAQ broadcaster.

Attached are the Phase 3b damped and undamped TFs of SR2 taken over the last few months.

Note, there is only the damped M2 stage TF due to the fact that there is a broken coil o magne at that stage and I was leary of driving too hard or too much.

Attached are the Phase 3b damped and undamped TFs of SRM taken over the last few months.

I looked into the coherence of DARM with all channels, using 10 minutes of data from 2015-04-02 11.00.00 UTC, which seems a period of high and stable range from the detchar summary page. Here is the result:

https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~gabriele.vajente/bruco_1112007616/

And as usual, my digest. In very brief summary, nothing really new above 10 Hz, OMC noise below 10 Hz.

• Low frequency noise (below 10 Hz) shows significant coherence with OMC suspension and alignment signals, for example SUS-OMC_M1_NOISEMON_T3, SUS-OM3_M1_LOCK_P_IN1, SUS-OM2_M1_LOCK_P_IN1 etc (see first plot)
• In the 10 to 100 Hz region there is quite some coherence with ITMY longitudinal control signals. Is this due to some subtraction scheme? Even if that's the case, a good subtraction should make DARM incoherent with anything else (see second plot). The same level of coherence is visible with MICH signal (third plot), so my guess is that this is indeed the residual coupling of MICH noise.
• In the 10 to 40 Hz region there is some coherence with BS yaw control (4th plot)
• Coherence with SRCL and PRCL is quite high too in the 20 to 80 Hz region (5th plot).
• The 56.75 Hz line is coherent with ETMY ISI signals, for example ISI-ETMY_ST2_BLND_RZ_GS13_CUR_IN1. Same at 170.5 Hz, 398 Hz, 534.75 Hz
• At 100 Hz there is some coherence with EX magnetometers
• Usual coherence with IMC and PSL periscope signals at the peaks between 180 and 400 Hz
• The band between 414 and 420 Hz is highly coherent with PRCL, same for 971-973 Hz
• At 750 Hz there is high coherence with intensity noise. Same (but slightly lower coherence) at 1980 Hz
• At high frequency intensity noise is still a safe factor below the measured DARM noise
• There is large coherence at 1009.75 Hz with LVEA magnetometer signals: PEM-CS_MAG_LVEA_OUTPUTOPTICS_QUAD_SUM
• In the band 1186-1195 there is coherence with SRCL/PRCL but most interesting with MCL and REFLSERVO signals (plot 6)
• At high frequency there is still the usual broadband low coherence with PRCL and SRCL signals, projecting about a factor ~3 below the DARM noise floor.

v1.0   2015April 02

Plan for HAM6 Vent, April 2-8, 2015

Approved work to be done:

1. OM1 mirror replacement.
2. Install a 90:10 BS in OMCR.
3. Lubricate beam diverter with Krytox LVP  (verbal approval by D. Coyne, 4/1/2015, for limited use)
4. QPD cables strain relief.
5. Measure HAM6 power budget.

DCC Vent Documents referenced in this plan:

• E1201035-v17, "aLIGO Chamber Entry & Exit Procedures"  https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-E1201035
• M1100039, "Hanford Checklist - HAM Door Removal"  https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-M1100039
• M1300464-v4, "Procedure for preparing aLIGO IFO for pumpdown"  https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-M1300464

Additional Documentation:

• The ECR approving the use of Krytox LVP is E1400353.
• The Beam Diverter assmbly is described in E1100686-v3 .

The HAM6 door to be removed is the "East" door.

Schedule

Thursday, April 2, 2015

1. 1st cleaning of HAM6 area [technical cleaning crew]
2. Move Clean Room (CR) into position for HAM6, turn on fans, and verify fans are working [Bubba, Gerardo]
3. Set up dust monitor and verify it is working. [Jeff B.]

Monday, April 6, 2015

1. 2nd cleaning of HAM6 [technical cleaning crew]
2. Verify and confirm CR (clean room) supplies are in place (gowns, change room, ...). [Jeff B. or Betsy]
3. Verify safe.snap files. [CDS: Dave Barker]
4. Review and follow E1201035-v17, "aLIGO Chamber Entry & Exit Procedures" checklist as annotated by Calum and Dennis for abbreviated entry. https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-E1201035
5. Review and follow M1100039, "Hanford Checklist - HAM Door Removal" https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-M1100039 . [Betsy is keeper of the list]

Tuesday, April 7, 2015

1. Vacuum crew: Follow M1300464-v4, "Procedure for preparing aLIGO IFO for pumpdown". https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-M1300464 . Note on Fast Shutter: De-energize HAM6 Fast Shutter High Voltage (HV) and Low Voltage (LV) as per the following steps:
   1.  Set HV switch on fron of panel on D1400078 to “disable”.
      
   2.  Shut off Kepco power supply (LV Power Supply Room) serving fast shutter.
      
   3.  Back at D1400078 set rocker switch to off position on back of D1400078.
2. CDS controls crew check: The controls system needs to be up and running during the HAM6 work, so make sure that normal Tuesday maintenance activity on CDS doesn't interfere with the vent activities.
3. Verify Purge Air on.
4. Wipe down of door. [Technical Cleaners]
5. Lock HEPI, apply HEPI dust covers
6. Transition to "Laser Safe" (IR, TSC 10um); End Station green lasers to remain on as closed gate valves block beams into LVEA [clarify with P. King]
7. Close Gate Valves to Arm Cavities
8. Start vent on HAM6, estimate 1-2 hours duration. [Kyle or Bubba]
9. Dust Monitors - verify operation and take readings for before and after entry. [Jeff B.]
10. Remove door, following M1100039
11. In-chamber work (ISI lockers access through East door ) [Koji A. is team captain]:

In-chamber Work Plan:

Preparation

- Open East door of HAM6
- ISI locking
- Align the beam on the AS_C QPD
- Align the beam on the OMC QPDs
- Confirm the beam is on the WFS QPDs

OM1 mirror replacement

- OM1 mirror replacement

New optic
Usual CLASS B Allen wrenches
First contact removal kit: UHV N2 & ionizing blow kit
If removal of the optics does not work:
=> CG: Tip Tilt Spare
S/N 28 is in a bag on the bottom shelf of rack in the Optics Lab, if needed.

- Align the spots on OMC QPDs/WFS QPDs with OM1 and OM2
- Check if the BOSEM values are OK or not.

If not, we need to retune the BOSEM positions (debiasing)
A hex box wrench for BOSEM adjustment

- Check or align the AS_AIR path
- Align AS_C QPD

At LLO, pitching up of the OM1 suspension was observed. This case, the balancing screws needs to be replaced. Therefore it’s better to prepare
CLASS A #8-32 set/cap screws/nuts

Inserting a 90:10 BS in OMCR

- Check if the small mirrors at the OMC REFL have no clipping
- Insert the 90:10 BS in the path.

The optic on the mount
CG: 2” Mount for new BS & post
We definitely do not have 2" Mirror Mounts. We have plenty of 2" lens holders. We have varying posts, so we should confirm what works with lens holder.
=> This is OK

As Lisa states, we have a bag of these (E1500009) in the Optics Lab. They still need to be cleaned.

ISC Dog Clamps:
There are bags of both type of ISC-specific dog clamps on the shelf in Optics Lab.

- Dump the reflection with the beam dump

The beam dump on the mount
CG: V-Holder Beam Dump Assembly
We have these parts in the Optics Lab.

- Align the OMC REFL AIR path to recover the alignment
- Align the OMC REFL QPDs

QPD cable strain relief

- Attach QPD cable strain relief to AS_C/OMCR_A/OMCR_B QPDs

3x D1101910
3x D1101911
3x SHCS 1/4-20 x1/2” non plated
6x SHCS 8-32 x 1/2” non plated
CG: I have both Peek parts & we also must have c&B-ed the hardware for them, because two bags of bolts were with the parts.
I have put all (4) bags in the H1 Spare QPD tote under the optics Table.

Lubrication of the beam diverter

- Apply Krytox on BD
Krytox: Permission received from Dennis Coyne, application tips from Matt H./Rich A. => Some information will be provided in a couple of days)

Counterweight for Beam Diverter

Need to see what type of screw can be used for the hole on the Beam Diverter and see what we have. We should be OK.

HAM6 Power Budget

- Measure optical power (OMC Unlocked) OM1 incident

OM1 transmission
OM1 BS incident
OM1 BS transmission vs AS_C sum OM1 BS reflection
AS_AIR (window transmission) OM2 incident
OM3 incident
OMC incident
OMC Reflection (Unlocked)
OMCR BS90/10 incident
OMCR BS90/10 reflection
OMCR BS90/10 transission
OMCR BS50/50 transission
OMCR BS50/50 reflection
OMCR QPDA incident (vs OMCR QPDA digital reading) OMCR QPDB incident (vs OMCR QPDB digital reading) OMCR AIR (window transmission)

- Lock OMC

(OMC incident)
OMC transmission (DCPDA/DCPDB analog/digital reading)
OMC REFL
OMC leakage trans?
For locking the OMC, we need to turn stop the purge air, and probably stop/lower the HEPA fans.

Exit procedure

- Take photos of the table => Send them to Eddie - Ground loop check
- ISI unlock

The following may take place on Wednesday.
- Hang door
- OM1 TF check
- Prepare for Door closing and Pumpdown

Wednesday, April 8, 2015

1. After completion of in-chamber work, obtain approval and signatures for volume closure, LHO (see E1400474-v1). [Vern]
2. Obtain sign off signatures for chamber closure.
3. Verify ISI unlocked.
4. Notify door crew to hang door.
5. Assess status of suspension, TF measurements. [Betsy or Jeff K.]
6. Verify readiness to pump down, follow M1300464-v4, "Procedure for preparing aLIGO IFO for pumpdown". Re-confirm that all high voltages are off.
7. Notify Vacuum crew of readiness to start pumps.
8. Restore HEPI
9. Return to Laser Hazard Condition
   

The transitions to and from "Laser Safe" need to be reviewed with Peter King.  The is the possibility of additional transition cycles during the in-chamber time period.  There may be independent cycling of the CO2 (10um) lasers. These need to be worked out in more detail.

The pump down is at the time and discretion of the Vacuum crew.

Reminder: File work permits for all door openings and closings. [Vacuum Crew]

For Reference:

ISC Prep Work (Corey's List)

Strain Relief Assy:
I have both Peek parts & we also must have c&B-ed the hardware for them, because two bags of bolts were with the parts.  I have put all (4) bags in the H1 Spare QPD tote under the optics Table.

Krytox
I have a tube of it in my desk (center drawer).  John was asking about waivers from Dennis for this (so we should look to see if those are around; perhaps in some Heintze documentation?).

Tip Tilt Spare
S/N 28 is in a bag on the bottom shelf of rack in the Optics Lab, if needed.

2" Mount for new BS & post
We definitely do not have 2" Mirror Mounts.  We have plenty of 2" lens holders.  We have varying posts, so we should confirm what works with lens holder.

V-Holder Beam Dump Assembly
We have these parts in the Optics Lab.
90% BS
As Lisa states, we have a bag of these (E1500009) in the Optics Lab.  One still needs to be cleaned for next week.

ISC Dog Clamps
There are bags of both type of ISC-specific dog clamps on the shelf in Optics Lab.

Counterweight for Beam Diverter
I need to see what type of screw can be used for the hole on the Beam Diverter and see what we have.  We should be OK.

OM1 Mirror
An OM1 mirror (E1100056) should be found and cleaned by Corey.

Koji, Sheila, Dan, Evan

Summary

Noise coupling measurements for MICH, SRCL, PRCL, intensity, and frequency have been taken.

We also tried a few small noise-hunting activities.

Details

Coupling measurements

For PRCL, MICH, and SRCL, we excited each dof with a swept sine and then recorded the transfer function from the error signal (IN1) to the DARM channel. MICH was already done previously.

For intensity, we did the same as described earlier.

For frequency, we used the same DAC channel (LSC-EXTRA_AO_2) to drive the common-mode board excitation point with a few millivolts of swept sine. Then we recorded the transfer function from REFL_A_9I (which is out of loop) to the DARM channel.

The dtt files are attached. More analysis to follow.

Other

Koji and I saw that ASC-MICH_P had significant cohrence with the DARM spectrum between 20 and 40 Hz. We took an OLTF and found that the UGF was 2 Hz with 60° of phase. We installed an elliptic LPF at 20 Hz, which removed most of this coherence (see attached). Correspondingly, the DARM spectrum dropped by a factor of 1.5 or so around 30 Hz.

We then tried to tune the bias of the EX ESD to see if we could improve the DARM spectrum. We could not find a sharp optimum; rather, anything from −190 V to 0 V seemed to be OK.

Koji then suggested trying to excite a scattering shelf in DARM by driving the OMC suspension. We drove the suspension longitudinally, transversely, and then vertically by a few microns at 0.15 Hz, but we found we could not make anything appear in the DARM spectrum.

Twice today the high voltage for the OMC PZT tripped, requriring the power supply to be reset by hand. The voltage is set at 100 V and the current limit is 2 mA. The quiescent draw is 0.8 mA.