Displaying reports 70081-70100 of 83107.Go to page Start 3501 3502 3503 3504 3505 3506 3507 3508 3509 End
Reports until 18:21, Wednesday 13 August 2014
H1 ISC
alexan.staley@LIGO.ORG - posted 18:21, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13386)
SR2 Alignment into HAM6
(Alexa, Koji, Dan)
 
We wanted to fine tune our SR2 alignemnt of the beam through the FI into HAM6.
 
We first started with the analog camera facing into HAM5. We used the cage around SRM and centered the beam first in YAW and then in PITCH.
Using SRM cage:
RIGHT: P1900 Y -110
LEFT: P1900  Y3150
TOP: P 780 Y 1520
BOTTOM: P3190 Y1520
 
Center config: P 1985, Y 1520
 
We then fine tuned this even further by examining the beam in HAM6 and seeing when the beam disappeared. We again first centered YAW and then PITCH.
Using HAM6 light
RIGHT: P1985 Y2048
LEFT: P1985 Y1252
TOP: P2437 Y1650
BOTTOM: 1672, Y1650
Center config: P 2054, Y 1650
 
We repeated our YAW centering with the improved PITCH centering and found it was still valid.
RIGHT: P2054 Y2047
LEFT: P2054 Y1250
 
FINAL CONFIG of SR2: P 2054, Y 1650
 
Finally we adjusted the pico to center the beam on QPD ASC_AS_C. We can now use this as an alignment reference.
Images attached to this report
H1 SEI (DetChar)
krishna.venkateswara@LIGO.ORG - posted 18:13, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13402)
H1 EX BRS Installation, Day 7: Tuesday night data
Jeff K., Krishna V.

The data from Tuesday (August 12) night looks very encouraging. The tiltmeter was in vacuum (but not being pumped, so P my be ~ mtorr) and the box was closed. The first plot shows the tiltmeter data (high passed at 10 mHz) over 40k seconds starting from ~9 PM. I've divided by the transfer function to take out the resonance. Note that the vacuum vessel is still not wrapped in foam and doing so along with turning on the ion pump should improve the low frequency noise.

The next plot shows the ASD of 15k seconds of the above data during the quiet part in the middle. The third plot shows the ASD of 5k seconds of data from above, showing the quietest angle data I've ever seen :)

I'll add more about the investigation of the transfer function measurement, hopefully later tonight.
Images attached to this report
H1 SYS (DetChar, SEI, SUS)
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:58, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13401)
All but ETMY SEI and SUS Systems In SAFE Mode
J. Kissel, J. Warner

In preparation for the planned power outage, Jim and I have brought all SUS and SEI systems to their SAFE mode -- except for ETMY -- such that there is no digital request for drive. Borja will continue to measure charge on ETMY ESD for a bit longer before moving EY to SAFE.

@DetChar -- The next few hours before the power outage is a great time to get free-swinging measurements of suspension resonances. 
All SUS (except ETMY) are in SAFE as of Aug 14 01:00 UTC.
H1 ISC
kiwamu.izumi@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:15, Wednesday 13 August 2014 - last comment - 17:25, Wednesday 13 August 2014(13381)
IMC cavity pole measurement: hmmmmm...

Sheila, Kiwamu (a report from yesterday)

We switched the approach for assessing the IMC loss from the ring down measurement (alog 13319, alog 13280) to a cavity pole measurement.

The estimated cavity pole is 7745 Hz while the previous measurement was 8850 Hz which was done in February in 2013 (alog 5429).

Note that an expected value from the mirror transmissivity measurements (see the galaxy web) without taking losses into account is 9011 8625 Hz (Thanks Dan !).


(The setup)

We tried reproducing the same setup as the previous measurement (alog 5429). We used a PDA55 for monitoring the injected intensity modulation on the PSL. This is the one under the periscope i.e. H1:PSL-PERISCOPE_A_DC. Then we hooked up an SR785 to this PD and the IMC trans PD (H1:IMC-TRANS) which is an PDA100A on IOT2L. We drove the AOM with an amplitude of 200 mV and frequency band from 1 kHz to 100 kHz, swept sine. We did two kinds of measurement -- first, we measured the IMC cavity pole by driving the AOM and taking transfer function from the PSL periscope PD to the IMC-TRANS PD. Secondly, we measured the PD responses by taking the transfer function of the same PD, but without any IMC interference by misaligning MC2. Note that in order to perform the second measurement we moved the position of the PD to the IMC-REFL path such that it can observe the direct reflection from MC1. Again, these procedure are the same as the previous measurement.

(The result)

After taking the two transfer functions, we divided the IMC cavity pole transfer function by the PD response transfer function in order to reduce the effect of the PD responses. The below is the resultant transfer function and its fitting result.

I used the same fitting algorythm as Giacomo used (see alog 5541). The fitted cavity pole is at 7745 Hz. Since the data was noisy and showed a funny bump avobe 30 kHz, we excluded the data above it. Also, if we do not correct the PD response, the cavity pole is at 8380 Hz.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
daniel.hoak@LIGO.ORG - 17:25, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13398)

Kiwamu and I took a second look at the galaxy optics page and we recalculated the H1 IMC finesse - it should be 527, neglecting absorption and the MC2 transmission.  The cavity pole should be 8625 Hz.

LHO VE
kyle.ryan@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:55, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13396)
Pre-power outage activities for vacuum system
1600 - 1645 hrs. local -> Isolated and shut down aux. pump carts @ HAM1, HAM3, BSC3 and BSC1 -> Isolated and spun down turbos @ YBM, XBM and X-end.  Also, shut down corresponding QDP80s
H1 CDS
cyrus.reed@LIGO.ORG - posted 15:28, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13394)
DMT Going Offline
I will be taking down the DMT system shortly in advance of the power outage.  It will not be back until later tomorrow. (WP 4796)
H1 TCS (TCS)
greg.grabeel@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:39, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13392)
Polarizer Window Bonding

The polarizers were retested today after #015 was redone by Alastair and the silicon had some time to cure. I remeasured the offset of all the polarizer windows, where ↑ is right side up for the label and ↓ is upside down with the label. Nominal height is 4" but it looks like there was a slight upward angle from the mirror.

015 4 1/32" 0.3 mrad
4 3/32" 0.9 mrad
011 4 1/16" 0.6 mrad
4 1/32" 0.3 mrad
009 4 1/16" 0.6 mrad
4 1/16" 0.6 mrad
008 4 9/32" 2.8 mrad
3 5/8" 3.1 mrad
001 3 13/16" 1.3 mrad
4 1/4" 2.5 mrad
The requirement is 7 mrad so all of the new polarizer windows look good.
H1 ISC
alexan.staley@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:22, Wednesday 13 August 2014 - last comment - 11:49, Friday 15 August 2014(13391)
Beam Path in HAM6

(Koji, Alexa, Dan)

 

We examined the beam path in HAM6 to OM1 in order to figure out the angle of the beam. We made measurements at four different points. Using an (x, y, z) coordinate system with z = up, y = East, x = South, we find at (all in mm):

Edge of table: (20.32, 0, 98)

Intermediate point 1: (0, 552.72, 95)

Intermediate point 2: (-25.4, 1219.2, 93)

OM1: (-40.64, 1574.8, 91)

The error of the measurement in height is ±1mm, and the error along the x, y axis is ±2.5mm. The attached layout shows the original (red) beam path and the new (green) beam path. From this layout, one can see the actual vs. measured angle deviation in height and along the hoirzontal plane.  Using the points above, we made a linear regression and determined the vertical angle of the beam to be 4.3 mrad. The attached plot shows the data with error bars and the linear fit. 

Images attached to this report
Non-image files attached to this report
Comments related to this report
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 17:27, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13399)

So the situation now is this:

  angle of the beam [mrad] position of the beam at OM1 design center [mm]
PIT (positive=up) -4.3 -10.6
YAW (positive=North) (-39.7, though the absolute number is not that important here.) -50.8mm

Because of this, Koji had to tilt the OM1 up by about 4.3mrad, which is big, and I'd say that there's a high chance we will want to fix the beam angle some time in the future (e.g. larger bounce to alignment coupling).  YAW is not that much of a problem because there's enough space to absorb -50.8mm.

We've been discussing how to alleviate this, and the simple hack is to rotate the septum window, which is supposed to have a 0.75deg horizontal wedge which causes 5.9mrad deflection.

According to ICS (via Joe), we should have D1101092 S/N assembly, which should have D1101005 window S/N15, which has dimension measurement that suggests 0.745deg wedge.

However, Koji measured the wedge using laser pointer and got 0.89deg which should cause 7.0mrad deflection. His measurement also suggests that the thickest side is facing south.

Now, when we rotate the septum window by X (positive=clockwise), PIT deflection was zero before but now the beam is deflected vertically by sin(X)*5.9mrad (or 7.3mrad).

Horizontally,   the deflection is -5.9mrad (or -7.3) before rotation, and -cos(X)*5.9mrad (or 7.3) after, so the change in the angle would be 5.9mrad*(1-cos(X)).

If we optimize the septum rotation (which only changes by 30deg steps) for 0.75deg septum we need to rotate the septum by 120 deg clockwise.

For 0.89deg septum wedge, it would be 150deg clockwise. See below.

(The beam position change at OM1 is calculated by using 1.93m as the distance from OM1 to the septum.)

Septum rotation (deg) Septum wedge (deg),
and deflection (mrad)
PIT deflection change (mrad) PIT beam pos at OM1 (mm) PIT beam angle (mrad) YAW deflection change (mrad) YAW pos at OM1 (mm)
120

0.75, and 5.9

+5.1

-10.6+5.1mrad*1930mm
= -0.8mm

5.1-4.3=+0.8mrad

+5.9+2.95

=8.85

-50.8+8.85mrad*1930mm
=-50.8+17.1mm

0.89, and 7.0

+6.1

-10.6+6.1mrad*1930
= +1.2mm

+6.1-4.3=+1.8mrad

+7.0+3.5
=+10.5

-50.8+20.3mm

150 0.75, and 5.9 +2.95 -10.6+2.95mrad*1930
= -4.9mm
+2.95-4.3=-1.35mrad +5.9+5.1
= +11.0
-50.8+21.2mm
0.89, and 7.0 +3.5 -10.6+3.5mrad*1930
= -3.8mm
+3.5-4.3=-0.8mrad +7.0+6.1
= +13.1
-50.8+25.3mm

Anyway, there's not much difference, but since the ICS says 0.745deg wedge, we need to rotate it by 120 deg clockwise if we decide to do it.

koji.arai@LIGO.ORG - 07:27, Friday 15 August 2014 (13419)

Keita and I concerned about the AR reflection from the septum. We thought we should at least check where the AR reflection goes.
This required to make a 3D version of the ray tracing. The result is, in short, the rotation of the wedged window(by 120 or 150deg)
makes the returning beams closer to the arrangement with the nominal beams. They fly about 30-40mm North of the aperture on Faraday.


In this entry, the wedge angle of 0.75 deg is assumed.

The "nominal" beam means: "Use the HAM6 dawing. Assume this incorporates the wedging effect by the septum window."

The "actual" beam means: "Use the measured beam geometry in HAM6."

The "actual+120" and "actual+150" means: "The beams expected by rotating the septum by 120 or 150 deg in CW. The "actual" beam used for the calculation.


1st attachment is an example view of the ray tracing result.


2nd attachment shows the spot positions on OM1 viewed from the back side of OM1.
Rotation of the septum by 120 deg makes the spot close to the "nominal" beam position.
"+120deg" gives us better result than "+150deg".

Note that the result I obtained here are consistent wth Keita's handwriting calculation for the OM1 spots.


3rd attachment

The beam was back-traced to HAM5. We expect that there is a 20mm aperture (iris) at 315mm from the septum window.
It is assumed that the apertue is located at the beam properly. The primary and secondary reflections are located about 35~40mm North of the aperture.
According to D0900623, these beams might be hitting the beam dump for the PBS, but not so clear.

4th attachment

This time, the actual beam was traced-back. Without rotation, the secondary beam definetely hits the apeture structure.
The primary reflction is ~30mm away from the aperture. The rotation moves the secondary reflection further away to North.
Vertical displacement is 5~10mm. So, we can say that the rotation makes the spots close to the original positions.

Images attached to this comment
keita.kawabe@LIGO.ORG - 11:49, Friday 15 August 2014 (13431)

In all of these cases, it seems like all ghost beams will fall on the Faraday Isolator Refl Baffle which is mounted on the suspension cage.

https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-D0900136 (Output Faraday Assy)

https://dcc.ligo.org/D0902845-v5 (Faraday Isolator Refl Baffle)

H1 CDS (PEM)
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:54, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13390)
h1oaf0 rebooted to clear zero'ed ADC channels

Robert, Christina, Dave

Robert and Christina reported some corner station PEM channels with ADC values of zero. I power cycled the h1oaf0 front end computer and its IO Chassis and these channels are now non-zero.

Sequence was:

LHO VE
kyle.ryan@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:05, Wednesday 13 August 2014 - last comment - 15:41, Wednesday 13 August 2014(13389)
UPDATE: Corner Station pumpdown
Investigation reveals that all (3) running turbos on site (YBM, XBM and X-end) shut down simultaneously at 1603 hrs. local time yesterday -> Coincidentally, this was only a few minutes prior to my opening of GV2 -> As such, my earlier theory of the XBM turbo tripping off on its safety valve pressure setpoint turned out not to be the case -> This is confirmed also by the fact that PT170A never came on scale.

Today at ~1230 hrs. local -> I spun-up to 100% rpm the troublesome XBM turbo by employing the technique of "loading" the rotor.  To do this, I maintained the turbo inlet pressure at ~ 0.2 torr by adjusting the "up-to-air" needle valve at the turbo's inlet while it spun-up -> Once at full speed, I shut off the air and eventually valved-in the turbo to the XBM volume.  


ERRORS in PRESSURE GAUGES
Also, the LHO vacuum equipment is beginning to show its age as we have been experiencing an increase in the failure rate of the site cold-cathode gauges (lifetime maturation) -> most noticeably PT180B, PT120B and PT170B are reading bogus values now for portions of their nominal range.  As of this writing, both the YBM and XBM turbo inlet CC gauges are reading 1.8 x 10-6 torr which is what I would expect for the recent history -> I would then guess the pressure at BSC2 to be 5-7 x 10-6 torr
Comments related to this report
john.worden@LIGO.ORG - 15:41, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13395)

Photos of the violent dust storm approaching are here:

https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=13366

and here:

https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=13365

H1 CDS (DAQ)
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:33, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13388)
CDS model and DAQ restart report, Tuesday 12th August 2014

There were 167 restarts due to storm related power glitching. Also some unexpected restarts of h1fw1. I have attached the list to spare the casual reader the gory details.

Non-image files attached to this report
H1 TCS (TCS)
greg.grabeel@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:01, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13344)
A Tale of 3 Lasers

It was the best of lasing. It was the worst of lasing. It was the best of shipments (although still bad). It was the worst of shipments. It was the season of single mode. It was the season of no modes. TCS has now received back the lasers that were sent to Access for repairs. Unfortunately the first shipment containing Lasy-50 20510-208160 and RF50 208160-20510 was sent to Caltech (an oversight in shipping) and then to Hanford. It was worse for the wear and the RF driver was busted, it was blowing fuses. Using the RF50 210040 to drive the laser proved more fruitful, while RF50 208160-20510 will be sent back to Access for repairs. Here are the laser/RF driver pairs and their outputs (running at 99% duty cycle) as tested:

Laser RF Driver Watts Notes
20510-208160                  210040                            ~53           RF50 208160-20510 Broken
20708-208100 20708-208100 ~53 RF50 water inlets bent
210020-20710 20710-210020 ~52 RF50 broken water inlet, replaced. Break in wire sheath, fixed.

Attached are some of the photos from the process, including the beam on an IR card.

Images attached to this report
H1 AOS (AOS)
filiberto.clara@LIGO.ORG - posted 11:43, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13387)
OP Lev Whitening Chassis EX / EY
Replaced insulating film used to isolate the -15V regulators to the chassis metal wall for OP Lev Whitening chassis at end stations.

EY - S1101539
EX - S1101552

Filiberto Clara
H1 DAQ
james.batch@LIGO.ORG - posted 10:50, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13385)
Restarted daqd on h1nds1 to test copied raw minute files.
The daqd process was restarted on h1nds1 to test the copied raw minute files.  WP 4790.
H1 ISC
alexan.staley@LIGO.ORG - posted 20:40, Tuesday 12 August 2014 - last comment - 10:21, Wednesday 13 August 2014(13378)
IMC Length Measurement

(Dan, Alexa)

Since the MC cavity length was adjusted, we repeated the MC cavity length measurement as described in alog 9679.

Data_refl9_short.txt is the data collected using REFL9. ArmCavityLength_v2.m is the script that determines the length given the zero crossing of the projection. The attached plot show the results with a linear regression included.

 

The cavity length is determined to  be L = 16.471698m ± 4um assuming 2 Hz accuracy. The 2 Hz accuracy comes from the accuracy of the IFR plus the extreme rattyness of the transfer function.

Compared to the previous measurement the delta L = L_old - L_new =  0.001914 ± 6um. This is very close to the expected 2mm reduction in length as mentioned in alog 12654.

 

If desired, we can repeat the measurement and include a zero crossing for REFL45 as well. However, we just wanted to make a measurement and get the result public...

Non-image files attached to this report
Comments related to this report
daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - 10:21, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13384)

Looking at the PRC length measurement from alog 10642, we can reevaluate the relative length mismatch:

Parameter Value Unit
FSRPRC 2.600075 MHz
LPRC 57.6508 m
FSRMC 9.100229 MHz
LMC 16.471698 m
FSRMC / 3.5 - FSRPRC -5 Hz
(1 - FSRMC / 3.5 FSRPRC) LPRC 0.1 mm
(1 - 3.5 FSRPRC / FSRMC) LMC -0.03 mm

Right on target! 9.100230 MHz should become the new modulation frequency.

Non-image files attached to this comment
H1 ISC
alexan.staley@LIGO.ORG - posted 20:07, Tuesday 12 August 2014 - last comment - 17:56, Wednesday 13 August 2014(13375)
HAM6 Septum Angle Measurement

(Dan, Koji, Masayuki, Alexa)

We measured the HAM6 septum angle using a laser pointer. We confirmed that there was no observable vertical component to the wedge angle, and then proceeded to measure the horizontal angle. We pointed the laser pointer such that the retro-reflected beam off the surface of the septum returned approximately directly back. Then we measured the distance from the second reflection to this point. This distance was 17mm. The distance from the laser pointer to the septum was measured to be 360mm.

This gives: wedge horizontal angle: 17/360 * 180/pi /2 /1.45 = 0.93 deg

In the equation above the factor of 2 comes from the optical lever effect. Meanwhile the factor of 1.45 comes from applying snells law with the index of refraction for glass and assuming the small angle approximation (see attached drawing).

This measurement was not extremely precise, but was close enough to the expected value of 0.75 deg.

In the attached picture, you will see the retro-reflected beam, which is almost ontop of the outgoing beam, and the second reflected beam. We used the ruler below to measure the separation.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
koji.arai@LIGO.ORG - 17:56, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13400)

Koji

As the things are getting more precise, I pulled out my old raytracing calculation for an wedged angle.
This gave me the wedge angle of 0.91deg.

This includes the new effect of
- Refractive index of fused silica at 632.8nm (n=1.457)
- Average thickness of the window ((0.948+0.870)/2 = 0.909" = 23.1mm)
- Non-orthogonal input angle

The primary beam is distant from the laser diode by -8mm while the secondary beam from the backsurface is at +9mm.
This condition was fullfilled when the wedge angle is 0.91deg.

The attached plots are:
Attachment1: The overview of the rays
Attachment2: Zoomed view of the optic part
Attachment3: Zoomed view of around the source

Images attached to this comment
H1 AOS
filiberto.clara@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:50, Monday 11 August 2014 - last comment - 14:26, Wednesday 13 August 2014(13337)
ETMY and ETMX ESD
Added the ESD Bias Path Filter Box (D1400192) to both ETMY and ETMX.
Units filter voltage noise present on the ETM bias path of the ESD HV drive.

Due to wiring differences inside the chamber, the filter units were connected as follows:
ETMY connected to pin 1 (Flange F2-3)
ETMX connected to pin 3 (Flange F2-3)

Filiberto Clara
Comments related to this report
filiberto.clara@LIGO.ORG - 14:26, Wednesday 13 August 2014 (13393)
EX
Current Limit Box D1201288      SN S1400223
ESD Bias Path Filter D1400192 SN S1400403

EY
Current Limit Box D1201288      SN S1400224
ESD Bias Path Filter D1400192 SN S1400405
Displaying reports 70081-70100 of 83107.Go to page Start 3501 3502 3503 3504 3505 3506 3507 3508 3509 End