Alexa, Kiwamu,

We spent most of the daytime today for

• Measuring the spot position on various optics
• Moving the spot on PR2 by 12 mm to minimize the risk of clipping on the PR2 scraper baffle

There were a few noticable effects after the PR2 spot was moved:

• the right side of the BS elliptic baffle as seen by the analog camera became brighter.
• POPAIR_RF18 increased to 260 uW from 220 uW in the PRMI sb lock.
• However, the optical gain did not change either in PRCL of MICH, indicating that the recycling gain did not change.

Summary of the spot measurements before and after the unclipping.

(Some more notes)

We aimed for a displacement of 16 mm on PR2 in order to bring the beam to the ideal point according to Keita's measurement (see alog 14640).  However, later, I realized that I had picked a wrong number from his entry -- I must have chosen eitehr 14 or 10 mm. Anyway, the resultant dither measurement suggested that we moved it by 11.5 mm to the right direction on PR2. So it happened to fall into a OK displacement. I think that we anyhow improved the clipping situation on the PR2 baffle.

The POP extraction path was then corrected by using the pico-motorized mirror in HAM3. This was not a difficult task as the beam was hitting the swiss cheese baffle and therore it was visible. We then went out and did fine tunings. The pico motor was adjusted to recover the highest green TRX. We steered a steering mirror for each POP diode.

In order to compute the off-centering on HLTS, I used the mirror sizes described in D1101381.

• R = 132.5 mm
• L = 101.4 mm
• D = 206 mm for vertical 
• D = 120 mm for horizontal
• conversion factor for vertical = 52.5 mm per alpha
• conversion factor for horizontal = 94.9 mm per alpha

For computing the HSTS spot position, I used 42.2 mm per alpha (see alog 13765).

This is not blocking our progress right now, but M3 LL FAST IMON is not working, and M3 UR NOISEMON is lower than others by 6 db.

I know that this not the problem of actuation as giving DC offset for each coil moves the optic by roughly the same amount in a correct direction, and VMON works for all coils. There's no reason to believe that there is a big difference in the current/counts between coils.

Doug, Sheila Evan

We used the stage controller to align the PR3 oplev to <0.1 urad in yaw and pitch.

The dip switch board for PR3 now has the serial number H202. There are already H201, H203, and H204 in the oplev cabinet by the PSL. Other unlabeled boards should probably be assigned serial numbers accordingly.

J. Kissel

I've collected all the information necessary to reproduce the corner-station optical lever status report (see LHO aLOG 14749) for the end-station levers. I attach pictures, and tabulate info as before below.

Rack          Board      Optical Lever    Config Board  |------------------ Switch Status ----------------|    Centered?    Raw Segment Counts
              Number                       Installed?    Board    Switch                                        
                                                        CH Name   CH Name    Function    HI   LO    ON/OFF       

SUS H1-R2       1          ETMX               Yes          B0       1       +24 [dB]     X            OFF          No*      *SUS is Misaligned, 
  (pg 1)                 (pgs 2-3)                         B1       2       +12 [dB]     X            OFF                   so can't get info
                                                           B2       3       +6  [dB]          X       ON                
                                                           B3       4       +3  [dB]          X       ON
                                                           B4       5       (1:10)       X            OFF
                                                           B5       6       (1:10)            X       ON
                                                           B6       7       (1:10)       X            OFF
                                                           B7       8       Latch        X            OFF
                                                              Total ETMX TF = (1:10), G = +9 [dB]
 
                2          none               Yes          N/A                                                     N/A

SUS H1-R2       1          ETMY               Yes          B0       1       +24 [dB]     X            OFF          No*      *SUS is Misaligned
  (pg 4)                 (pgs 5-6)                         B1       2       +12 [dB]     X            OFF                   so can't get info
                                                           B2       3       +6  [dB]     X            OFF               
                                                           B3       4       +3  [dB]     X            OFF
                                                           B4       5       (1:10)            X       ON
                                                           B5       6       (1:10)            X       ON
                                                           B6       7       (1:10)       X            OFF
                                                           B7       8       Latch        X            OFF
                                                              Total ETMY TF = (1,1:10,10), G = 0 [dB]
 
                2          none               Yes          N/A                                                     N/A

I can confirm that any whitening stages have been correctly compensated for digitally. In addition, recall that ETMX is compensating for the gains shown above, but it's not necessary. Will fix all the levers and compensation on some (glorious) day (hopefully soon) when the IFO isn't needed.

LVEA: Laser Hazard
Observation Bit: Commissioning

08:00 Alarm on Mid-X Instrument Air; informed the vacuum group
08:18 Aidan – In LVEA to check TCS laser
08:40 Travis – Going to both end stations to work on PCal cameras
08:55 Robert & Sudarshan - End-X to work on PEM
09:00 King Water – On site for water sampling
09:25 Bubba – Repaired Instrument Air compressor at Mid-X
09:30 Filiberto – End-X to work on PEM cabling 
10:05 Jodi & Gary – At Y-End
10:45 Betsy & Sheila – In LVEA for quick survey
13:05 Alistar – Working on TCS in LVEA
13:30 Dave – DAQ restart
14:38 Jeff K. – Going to X & Y end stations to take pictures of OpLevs
15:18 Robert – In the beam tube enclosure between Mid and End-Y

Hanford transportation will operate during swing shift tonight, 10/31.  There's no indication that site crews will work over the weekend.  Over the last two weeks there's been some day-to-day variation in the number of containers moving in and out of ERDF because of high winds.  Transportation and rubble pit operations apparently aren't affected much by rain.

In preparation to correcting the Matrices on HEPI for HAM2, I generated new Plants to see if they'll be too different for the generic controllers.  Here are the Symmeterized L2L & C2C,the latter equivalent to the plant with a HEPI Position loop blend (1,0.)  The L2Ls are the same as the previous (data from 4 Sept 2013) since I did not collect new data.  But the C2C are different.  Attached are two pdf with all the plots to compare.

Bottom line--asside from the VP dof at DC, they all look pretty much the same and I think the generic loops will be fine.

This is related to Hugh's log 14774. To elaborate a bit on Hugh's log, I made a measurement with Stage 1 Damped only and HPI isolated. The first plot shows the GND_T240_X ,  ST1_T240_X  and HPI L4C (out of loop witness). There was no coherence with ground below 0.1 Hz but there was significant coherence with HPI L4C. This meant that HPI was somehow introducing excess low-frequency motion.

We then did the same measurement on ETMY and saw no such excess motion. The second pdf shows the corresponding measurement. Stage 1_Y was very coherent with ground_Y. Jim mentioned he had modified the HPI controllers on ETMY as described in Hugh's log, so we decided to try the same on ETMX in X and Y.

This has made a significant difference to the low frequency performance of Stage 1 as shown in the third file. Performance below 0.1 Hz is much closer to ground motion now.

Dave, Jeff [WP 4927]

the h1susauxh34 model  was modified to add EPICS channels to support the SUS Drift Mon program. The model was restarted at 13:22 and the DAQ was restarted to resync at 13:32. It was not a clean DAQ restart, mx-streams had to be restarted on h1pemmx, h1pemmy, h1susex and h1susauxex.

I reverted out my local changes to the driftmon files (changes needed when we didn't have the supporting epics channels) and svn updated this code to the latest version.

The Driftmon MEDM is linked to the SITEMAP via the SUS button on the left-hand block (see attached)

The python script to update the alarm levels is in the general search path. To run it to update all suspension the command is

driftmon_update.py H1 -H nds2.ligo-wa.caltech.edu -P 31200 -l 3600 -d 600 --minor-stdev=4 --major-stdev=5 --all

This gets data starrting one hour ten minutes ago up to one hour ago.

This closes out WP 4927.

The ever eagle-eyed Peter Fritschel found some duplicate PEM channels in my list of science-frame channels (see earlier aLOG entry 14718).  I had failed to remove an old channel list (H1PEML0.ini) from the compilation.  I redid all the files and tables after that change (see attached rate, channel list files). The commissioning-only counts did not change, as all PEM are in both frames)

I have posted the updated FrameRates spreadsheet and PDF of science, commissioning frame counts.

The science-frame H1 PEM rate drops from 6.79 to 4.19 MB/s (uncompressed). This is still equal to all the ISC channels (LSC,ASC,OMC,OAF,ISC).

Jim Krishna Hugh

The gain was too close to the UGF and there was very little margin.  The zero in the boost where it meets the main controller was lowered from 1.75 to 0.75 hz.  This lowered the boosted gain but it is only a position loop anyway.

I have created an MEDM showing the Guardian states for each suspension. It is linked from the SITEMAP screen through the GRD pull down menu.

Earlier this week I revisited tilt decoupling at ETMX. I thought that maybe since the local to cart matrices had been modified since the tilt decoupling was done, maybe the align elements would need tweaking. Happily (or not as I had hoped this would explain why Krishna's tilt subtraction wasn't working as well as it could) everything stil looks pretty good. Attached plots are for X, first is the tilt measurement, red off, blue on. Second pic is the flex modes from the T240s for the tilt off measurement, they didn't appear to change for on or off. I did Y as well. Everything is in the ETMX/Misc/TIlt_Decoupling folder of the SVN.

TCS: Aidan is leaving today. Alistar will continue TSC commissioning next week.
PEM: Filiberto pulling PEM cables at both end stations.
PCal: Travis will be working on PCal cameras at both end stations.  
Commissioning: In addition to general commissioning, Keita is working on the PR2 clipping problem.     
Charge Testing: Rai W. continues working on charge testing experiment at End-Y. 

Last night, we tried Z HEPI sensor correction on the BS. It did not go well. When I look at the data this morning, I didn't see the usual reduction in Z motion on the ISI seismometers, with low frequency re-injection. Instead, all we got was bad low frequency reinjection. The attached PDF shows performance from last night on the first 2 pages, with perfromance from the previous night on the last 2. The attached png shows the coherence between the ground STS and the ISI's St1 T240's. The solid lines are with sensor correction on, dashed are with sensor correction off. For some reason turning on Z sensor correction reduces coherence in the Y direction. Jeff and Fabrice have both suggested that maybe the op-lev damping is interfering with the sensor correction. The ground STS that was used for the sensor correction also is having issues, which Hugh has noted before. We'll keep digging.

The table below shows a comparison of the optical levers motion meaured during the five mornings of this week. We used ETMX to evaluate several configurations:

- Monday Oct 27, 3am - 4am, ETMX Stage 1 Z in Low Blend, Sensor Correction Off

- Tuesday Oct 28, 3am - 4am, ETMX Stage 1 Z in Low Blend, Sensor Correction Off

- Wednesday Oct 29, 3am - 4am, ETMX Stage 1 Z in High Blend, Sensor Correction Off

- Thursday Oct 30, 3am - 4am, ETMX Stage 1 Z in Low Blend, Sensor Correction On

- Friday Oct 31, 3am - 4am, ETMX Stage 1 Z in Low Blend, Sensor Correction On.  BS sensor correction also ON (BS servo still engaged)

(Jim, please correct if my description of the controls configurations is inacurate)

Results: optical levers RMS motion

                               ETMX  (Pitch/Yaw)       Other test masses average (Pitch/Yaw)           BS - Op Lev servoed (Pitch/Yaw)

Monday                    15nrad /20nRad                     30nrad / 30nRad                                      20nrad / 10nRad

Tuesday                    20nrad / 35nRad                   35nrad / 35nRad                                      15nrad / 35nRad

Wednesday               100nrad / 15nRad                  40nrad / 35nRad                                      15nrad / 10nRad

Thursday                  12nrad / 10nRad                   30 nrad / 40nRad                                     13nrad / 10nRad

Friday                       30 nrad / 10 nRad                30 nrad / 30 nRad                                     50 nrad / 50 nRad  

Comments:

- On Monday and Tuesday, ETMX pitch motion was better than the other test masses, even though using the same configuration

- Wednesday results on ETMX show why we need to blend low on Stage 1 Z to reduce the pictch motion (at the cost of amplifying Yaw)

- Thursday results on ETMX with Sensor Correction On are excellent. The angular motion is as low as on the BS that is servoed.

- Friday results on ETMX are not as good in Pitch as the night before, but it is still much lower than usual in Yaw.  The angular motion BS is very high. We might want to disable the op lev servo while testing the sensor correction on this unit. Jim is about to comment on BS sensor coreection activities.

Rana, Kiwamu, Lisa, Alexa, Sheila, Evan

We took some time to measure the 1f and 3f DRMI sensing matrices.

To do this, we used the digital lock-in oscillators on the LSC screen to feed back onto some of the DRMI optics (PR2, SRM, BS, and a combination of 1×BS + 0.02×PR2 that we refer to below as BS+PR2).

The procedure was as follows:

1. In the first digital oscillator lock-in matrix, we wired REFLAIR9I→DEMOD 5, REFLAIR9Q→DEMOD 6, REFLAIR45I→DEMOD 7, and REFLAIR45Q→DEMOD 8. Each demod had an 0.1 Hz Butterworth filter.
2. For each demod, we made all the power appear in I by running, e.g, cdsutils servo -r LSC-LOCKIN_1_DEMOD_5_Q_OUTPUT -g -10 -s 0 -t 100 LSC-LOCKIN_1_DEMOD_5_PHASE.
3. For each optic in turn, we enabled the oscillator in the output matrix. We then turned on a 131.7 Hz oscillator excitation whose amplitude was 15, 3333, 1999, and 1999 counts for PR2, SRM, BS, and BS+PR2, respectively.
4. We monitored the four demod I channels in StripTool. Then we used z avg -s 8 to average them.

Results for the 1f sensing matrix are as follows. The drive amplitudes have been divided out (and the entire matrix normalized).

The matrix elements for SRM (in red) are probably bogus, because we were saturating the SRM actuator while driving.

Then we repeated this for the 3f signals, with REFLAIR27I→DEMOD 11, REFLAIR27Q→DEMOD 12, REFLAIR135I→DEMOD 13, and REFLAIR135Q→DEMOD 14. The drive amplitudes were 15, 9333, and 1999 counts for PR2, SRM, and BS. The results are as follows. Again the drive amplitudes have been divided out (and the entire matrix normalized).

DRMI lost lock before we were able to get the BS+PR2 measurement for 3f.

Based on the TCSX central heating calibration (62.3 micro-diopters single-pass per Watt) and the calculated static lens of -80213m, we require:

+201mW of central heating on ITMX to correct this static lens.

Edited 31-Oct-2014: this isn't correct because of an error in the laser power calibration

Optical Lever Whitening Chassis Rack Locations and Chassis Locations and Current Binary Output Module Status at LHO: D.Cook 10/29/2014
Rack SUS H1-R1: Chassis cabled - Board 1- HAM 2 = No BOM installed
		  Chassis cabled - Board 2- HAM 3 = No BOM installed	
Rack SUS H1-R2: Chassis cabled - Board 1- HAM 2 = No BOM installed
		  Chassis cabled - Board 2- PR3  =  BOM installed
				B1, B2, B4, B9, B10, B12, 17, B18, B20, B25, 26, B28 set HIGH
				(the rest set LOW)
Rack SUS H1-R3: Chassis cabled - Board 1- HAM 5 = No BOM installed
				  Board 2- SR3 = BOM installed
				  B4, B12, B20, B28 set HIGH
 Rack SUS H1-R4: Chassis cabled - Board 1- HAM 4 = No BOM installed
		  Chassis not cabled - Board 2- Empty
Rack SUS H1-R5: Chassis cabled - Board 1- BSC 8 Pier (temp ?) = No BOM installed (jumpered connecter)
		  Chassis cabled - Board 2- BS  =  BOM installed
				B1, B3, B4, B9, B11, B12, 17, B19, B20, B25, 27, B28 set HIGH
				(the rest set LOW)
Rack SUS H1-R6: Chassis cabled - Board 1- ITMx =  BOM installed
				B4, B5, B12, 13, B20, B21, B28, B29 set HIGH
				(the rest set LOW)
   Chassis not cabled - Board 2- Empty
Rack SUS H1-R1 ETMy: Chassis cabled - Board 1- ETMy = BOM installed
				B4, B5, B12, 13, B20, B21, B28, B29 set HIGH
				(the rest set LOW)
		  Chassis not cabled - Board 2- Empty

Rack SUS H1-R1 ETMx: Chassis cabled - Board 1- ETMx = BOM installed
				B2, B3, B5, B10, B11, B13, B18, B19, B21, B26, B27, B29 set HIGH
(the rest set LOW)
Chassis not cabled - Board 2- Empty