This morning all the dust monitors in the LVEA reported communication errors. After restarting the IOC failed to resolve the problem, I power cycled the Comtrol. Restarting the IOC again after this fixed the problem. The root of the problem is unclear.

Guido and I moved three optics in the IO sensing path, to make room for a possible shift in the PSL periscope.  Picture attached.

This afternoon, I finished cabling MC1 and MC3 - we had stalled yesterday due to 1) broken signals on one MC1 cable as alogged earlier and 2) missing helicoils in the shared quadrapuss cable.  I bypassed the nicely cabled broken SRS cable for MC1 M2/Middle and swapped in a new cable (D1000225 S1105175 180").  This restored the signals.  For lack of time, I left the old SRS cable still nicely routed in it's bundle through the ISI.  I'm hoping SEI will redress the cables, removing the old, lacing the new, at some later date in our HAM2 work this month - no urgency.  WIth the cable issues finalized, I suspended both MC1 and CM3 and removed all of their FirstContact coverings.  I enabled all watchdog and turned on the damping loops.  All seems well - no tripping, at least.  I left them damping when I closed the chamber, but UFl was still working across the table.  MC1 and MC3 are ready for flashing.

• Pitch: 55 µrad up (with no First Contact)
  • Target: 12.5 µrad up, ±160 µrad (with no First Contact)
• Yaw: 80 µrad CW
  • Target: 0.0 ±160 µrad

We will set the gap/parallelism between the ITMy and CPy first thing Monday morning.  This will require a brief switch to Laser Hazard for the parallelism measurement (or measurements, depending on whether or not adjustment is required).  We will also take a look at the CPy roll and adjust as required.  The shield was placed over the front face of the quad and the cover pulled down for the weekend; damping was left OFF for both chains.

Attached are plots of dust counts > .3 microns and > .5 microns in particles per cubic foot from approximately 6 AM to 6 PM Thursday, November 8, 2012. Also included are plots of the modes to show when dust monitor 15 in the LVEA was turned off.

Kyle, Gerardo 
Moved BSC1 purge air connection from dome to chamber to facilitate dome removal.  

Kyle 
Removed 4.5" CFF electrical feed-through from HAM6 D5-3 and preserved Class A for TBD re-installation.  Installed 4.5"-2.75" zero-length reducer and 1.5" all-metal angle valve (for future HAM6 purge) at D5-3.  

HughR, MitchR, JimW

Today Team SEI pushed through most of the worst of the seismic optical table payload, but we ran into a couple of known issues. LLO found that these mass stacks somewhat interfere with the BS struts. But where Livingston only had to shift a few 1kg parts around, it looks like we have to move a 5kg mass. In the attached, somewhat cryptic, picture, the mass stack directly under the strut, and closest to the camera, is missing the interfering 5kg mass. We plan on shifting this mass to a neighboring stack, but that does mean the stacks will not be as uniform as on previous units.

For Robert and Keita I have reconfigured H2 DAQ to serve EY data which is archived on the frame writers disks. The ini files were set to acquire=0 before being put back into the h2dc0 master file.

The following systems were restored to the DAQ:

H2SUSETMY, H2SUSTMSY, H2HPIETMY, H2ISIETMY, H2ISCEY

The H2DAQ frame is now 9.2MB per 32 second frame, this is all slow data.

Unfortunately, the course alignment of the ITMy (BSC1 cartridge test stand) was not done last week.  Today, we started the fine alignment and discovered the main chain was mechanically grounding on one of the F3 magnet replacement blocks.  This required that we adjust the entire table cloth to alleviate this, (and then all 12 BOSEMs to follow that - ugh)!  The chain then swung further forward causing a larger yaw error.  So, we're back to yaw and pitch alignment.  Fortunately, Doug just had a crash course on yaw alignment techniques and is slowly working at it (an iterative process).

This morning, Filiberto swapped the SUS/HAUX cables on the outside of the chamber to the correct feedthru port.  However, there are now funny looking signals on MC1 Middle (M2-UL) and MC1 Lower (M3-LL).  Reportedly, there was an external cable switch and the signal stayed with the channel exhonorating the external cable as the problem.  To be continued...

[LukeW and RickS]

For the main input beam, we have assumed the center conflat flange is centered laterally in the HAM 1 door.

Yesterday, while checking the beam path between the IO periscope on the PSL/IO table, we found that the 10" conflat flange on the HAM 1 door is shifted to the left (when viewed from outside the chamber) by about a half an inch.

This impacts the performance of the shutter and beam dump that mounts to the input window housing - too much lateral offset and the beams might miss the silicon carbide dump.

We hoped that we might find another HAM door on which the conflat flange centering would be better.

Here is what we found for the positions of the center conflat flange relative to the HAM door (and HAM chamber flange) centerline (tolerances +,- 1/16"):

HAM1 9/16" to the left
HAM6 9/16" to the left
HAM7 5/16" to the left
HAM12 9/32" to the left

Replacing the HAM1 door with either the HAM7 or HAM12 door would get us 1/4" or so, but not likely enough to be worth the effort.

We will look for other options to better direct the beam through the various apertures.

At approximately 23:00 PST Nov. 8, both network trunk connections between the MSR and the h1 electronics room switch failed.  This caused loss of network access to the PSL enclosure for cameras, alarms, and control workstations.  

The cause of this failure is unknown.  The h1 electronics room switch was power cycled to restore the connection, so the likely failure point was that switch.  

The dust monitor labeled 'R' was put in the OSB bake oven room. It was started in the software around 9:34 AM.

Jeff B & Andres R

  We installed the Upper Structure Stays on the BeamSplitter mounted on BSC2. 

With Giacomo and Paul, we installed the MC3 suspension into HAM2 this morning.  The arm was able to reach the desired placement on the table easily, despite reports of skepticism.  After lunch we removed the cookie cutters and finished placing all of the dog clamps on MC3 and MC1.  There is one outstanding dog clamp due to a missing helicoil in it's spacer (to do tomorrow).  We then plugged in 6 of the 7 OSEM cables for MC3/MC1, placed the table cable brackets as per the layout dwgs, and stowed the loose cable coils.  Note, the SRS cables were a bit tight in the PEEK connectors down on stage 0 (?) of the ISI and I could not pull through any slack so I had to loosen all of them for MC3 in order fo the tablce cable bracket to make it to the appropriate spot on the table***.  Filiberto came out and connected all of the external cables from the feedthru to the satellite boxes, however after he left we noticed that the internal cable connections from the SRS cables are on the flange 180 deg out on the chamber.  Doh!  So, either the external lacing is on the wrong feedthu port, or the internal SRSes are - I have not checked.  Hopefully a quick fix tomorrow such that I can suspend and damp. 

***SEI - please see that I have not made any of the jumping segments too tight and shorted the stack.

I'm also planning to remove the FC tomorrow such that flashing of the MC can commence asap (and while I'm at LLo next week).

Mark B.

Starting TFs on both chains of ITMy. Will get as far as possible this afternoon and then hopefully continue later tonight. Priority is undamped M0 and R0, then damped M0 and R0.

Disconnected SUS SEI field cabling from HAM3 feedthrus to dress cabling inside cable trays around HAM3. All electronics were powered off before cables were disconnected. When reconnecting cables, had Corner 1 and 2 for ISI driver (Coarse and Fine) connected backwards. Hugo is trying to bring HAM3 ISI back up.

I recently made a new set of isolation filters level 2 for HAM3-ISI. 

1- I tried them with the new Step_8_Performance_Analysis commissioning script. Spectra are attached*. The blend filters used are the new 250mHz blend filters **. There are some discrepancies between the expected isolation and the measurement. This is especially noticeable along Z. I am not sure why yet.

2 - I also tried the same configuration with the new 100mHz blend** engaged on X and Y. I compared the spectra measured then, with the ones measured earlier this week. Isolation loops show good performance. There is some amplification of motion between 10Hz and 50Hz. This is mainly noticeable along X.

* .pdf created with a new matlab script. I am still perfecting. I should be able to add it to Step_8 soon.
** svn revision 6187