I moved the tune offset on the IMC VCO, and HAM2 HEPI tripped, (plot attached) HAM2 ISI, HAM3 IOP tripped so HEPI, ISI MC2, and PR2 were all tripped. 

While we were trying to recover things tripped again.

After all the model changes I reconfigured the conlog channel list. It added 205 channels and removed 104 channels.

The unmonitored number went to zero , but I noticed the queue size was at 9e06. Trending  shows that the queue increased linearly from zero to 1.8e7 from noon to 15:30 PDT this afternoon, then has been decreasing linearly with the same slope since then. I caught it at 9e06, it is now 6.7e6. Presumably at 19:00 it will be back to zero.

Following are the final alignment numbers for SR3.

• X axis position: -174.2 mm
  • Target: -174.2 mm
  • Error: 0.0 mm
  • Tolerance: ±3.0 mm
• Y axis position: -19616.1 mm
  • Target: -19615.9 mm
  • Error: -0.2 mm
  • Tolerance: ±3.0 mm
• Z axis position: -94.1 mm
  • Target: -95.0 mm
  • Error: +0.9 mm
  • Tolerance: ±3.0 mm
• Pitch: 375 µrad down
  • Target: 506 µrad down (0 µrad SR3 pitch + 506 µrad down correction for HR FC)
  • Error: 131 µrad up
  • Tolerance: ±560 µrad
• Yaw: 13.972 mrad CCW
  • Target: 13.857 mrad CCW
  • Error: 115 µrad CCW
  • Tolerance: ±200 µrad

Tomorrow morning I will begin setup for the X, Y, Z alignment of SRM so the alignment equipment is ready once SRM is installed.

As discussed last week during the SEI call, we are going to try to subtract the unwanted coupling from Z drive to RZ T240 Signal.

While we are still investigating the cause of this coupling (magnetic coupling test in the Staging building, Stage deformation FEA at MIT...), online subtraction is for now our only option to move forward.

This test can't be performed at the univeristies (Stanford and MIT protoypes use STS2's and the Stage 1 structures are different) so we have to try it at the sites.

Work permit #4626 has been filled and approved.

I am going to start modifying the Two stage Master simulink. We'll coordinate with install and commissioning activities as for when and which unit to use to test this modification.

Depending on results, we'll decide whether to revert or propogate this feature.

Spent some time driving each segment of the ESD individually with UL being week  and UR, LR not Really being seen.   LL and DC making the most movement as seen on the oplev.  

Trying to make some sense out of the unit put offsets on various combinations of ESD segments trying to get a decent yaw or pitch movement.  This would help with the swapped cable theory.  I would apply a 125K offset to two segment then make the offset -125k.  Again not much luck. 

Attached are a couple of the plots  first being individual drives.  Second LL and DC together then sign flip.  

Ran every combination of paring this is just representative of responses.  With UR,LR  the response was not as dramatic.

ETMY ISI tripped again, possibly when I isolated HEPI after already isolating the ISI.  The blends were also set incorrectly. (all Tbetter) We have been using Tcrayy for RZ on stage 1 and 2, and I think that we are still using Tcrappy for stage 2 RX (I wrote that Tbetter was wrong in alog 11563, and I'm not aware if anyone has fixed it.)

I also noticed that it is possible for the TMS guardian to say that TMS is alinged, even when the master switch is off.

I also burted asc and lsc to mid night last night.

I also moved IMTY blends from T750 back to Tcrappy, and turned on sensor correction

Tuesday 13th May 2014 Maintenance Summary

RFM DMA setting [WP 4625]

I modified all models running on h1susex, h1seiex, h1susey and h1seiey to add the "rfm_dma=1" setting in their CDS block. The models on these front ends were restarted following the procedure:

stop user models, restart IOP model, start user models

Initial results suggest the ISC to LSC IPC error rate is slightly worse if anything.

I had some problems modifying the h1isietmx.mdl file. It was locally modified and also modified in the repository. The local changes appear to be purely because the model was saved using matlab2011a (presumably during the network outage). I resaved the local version with matlab2012b. Then I checked out the repo version in my home directory and diff'ed the two files. They did not differ by any significant factors. So I reverted the h1 model, applied the dma changes and compiled.

DAQ Reconfigure

The DAQ was reconfigured due to:

• new h1asc model with additional Alignment Dither components (ADS)
• new quad sus models at the end stations
• modified Guardian EDCU file with non-operational systems removed (to green the EDCU)

The DAQ was restarted at 11:49 and 14:06PDT to support these changes.

h1asc

Some time ago I worked on the compile error of h1asc to add ADS components. At the time I had performed a "make install-h1asc" but we were not ready to start the new model.

today after the first DAQ restart h1asc went into 0x2000 DAQ status due to the modified INI file. I was able at 14:09PDT to restart the new h1asc model to return the DAQ synchronization.

The new model has receivers for the new ALS_ASC_LOCKIN_OSC_CLK RFM IPC parts (two per end station for OSC1 and OSC2). Of the four new IPC channels only one is working. The other three are maxed out on their receive errors (2048 per second).  Investigation is continuing.

OS patching

I performed the usual set of OS patches on vulnerable machines. No reboots were necessary to apply the patches.

Restart Reports Covering This Work

All times local PDT.

2014_05_13 10:48 h1hpietmx
2014_05_13 10:48 h1iopseiex
2014_05_13 10:50 h1isietmx
2014_05_13 10:51 h1iopsusex
2014_05_13 10:53 h1susetmx
2014_05_13 10:53 h1sustmsx
2014_05_13 11:21 h1susetmx
2014_05_13 11:24 h1susetmx
2014_05_13 11:49 h1broadcast0
2014_05_13 11:49 h1dc0
2014_05_13 11:49 h1fw0
2014_05_13 11:49 h1fw1
2014_05_13 11:49 h1nds0
2014_05_13 11:49 h1nds1
2014_05_13 13:41 h1susetmx
2014_05_13 13:51 h1susetmy
2014_05_13 13:52 h1susetmy
2014_05_13 13:57 h1iopsusey
2014_05_13 13:59 h1iopseiey
2014_05_13 13:59 h1susetmy
2014_05_13 13:59 h1sustmsy
2014_05_13 14:01 h1hpietmy
2014_05_13 14:01 h1isietmy
2014_05_13 14:06 h1broadcast0
2014_05_13 14:06 h1dc0
2014_05_13 14:06 h1fw0
2014_05_13 14:06 h1fw1
2014_05_13 14:06 h1nds0
2014_05_13 14:06 h1nds1
2014_05_13 14:09 h1asc
 

Today, I removed the FirstContact sheet from the SR3-AR surface.  Then, Jason and I aligned the SR3 in yaw and pitch.  After resetting the top stage BOSEMs, we confirmed with quick TFs in V, L, and P that the suspension is hanging free.  The lower stage OSEMs are not in place yet.  Jason will post final pointing numbers.  We are good to move on to the SRM installation and subsequent alignment in HAM5.  We should start that install tomorrow.

ETMX was probably due to sus modle restart, ITMY I'm not sure, ETMY guardian was red because it could not connect to a WD channel

Jim, Fabrice:

To help understanding the Z to RZ coupling, we have setup a test in the staging building in which we drive an actuator not attached to the structure. The actuator is seating on the top of Stage 1 (a few inches above where it is normally installed).  No brackets connected, indeed, so the actuator can't drive any motion.

We do see some direct pickup, as shown in th attached plot. The coherence is, however, stronger in the vertical directions, unlike the coupling we are chasing in the units installed in the chambers.

Reset HAM3 and HAM4

The last successful diff locking was on Thursday May 8, alog 11791 on May 9.
Below is a list of filter changes that happened on ETMX since then.

The two suspects are:
- L1 L2P filters
- ETMX_M0_DAMP_L filters

=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 230237 May  9 23:29 H1SUSETMX_1083738611.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 0 zpk([0.08374528339909944-i*0.2433218667356948;0.08374528339909944+i*0.2433218667356948; 
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 237364 May 10 00:06 H1SUSETMX_1083740794.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 0 zpk([0.04672029281627461+i*0.3883629479048338;0.04672029281627461-i*0.3883629479048338; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 1 zpk([0.01323117948903582+i*0.4349190738918082;0.01323117948903582-i*0.4349190738918082; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 5 zpk([0.0837452833985204+i*0.2433218667356947;0.0837452833985204-i*0.2433218667356947; 
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 0 zpk([0.04309093963903244+i*0.3314665390167811;0.04309093963903244-i*0.3314665390167811; 
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 1 zpk([0.3079048301517223;0.4191165157453778], 
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 237364 May 10 00:27 H1SUSETMX_1083742050.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 230526 May 10 00:42 H1SUSETMX_1083742948.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 0 zpk([0.04672029281627461+i*0.3883629479048338;0.04672029281627461-i*0.3883629479048338; 
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 1 zpk([0.01323117948903582+i*0.4349190738918082;0.01323117948903582-i*0.4349190738918082; 
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 5 zpk([0.0837452833985204+i*0.2433218667356947;0.0837452833985204-i*0.2433218667356947; 
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 230526 May 10 01:32 H1SUSETMX_1083745955.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 246604 May 10 03:42 H1SUSETMX_1083753759.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 0 zpk([0.831329491504266+i*0.9012257170546942;0.831329491504266-i*0.9012257170546942; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 1 zpk([0.002485877643515575-i*0.3946128198094371;0.002485877643515575+i*0.3946128198094371; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 5 zpk([0.08374528339823091+i*0.2433218667356947;0.08374528339823091-i*0.2433218667356947; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 0 zpk([0.05841220204334667+i*1.127241260196624;0.05841220204334667-i*1.127241260196624; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 1 zpk([-0.2851704563409714-i*0.2165396550111315;-0.2851704563409714+i*0.2165396550111315; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 5 zpk([0.04309093963845343+i*0.3314665390167811;0.04309093963845343-i*0.3314665390167811; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 6 zpk([0.3079048233615395;0.4191165225355606], 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_M0_DAMP_L 2 butter("BandPass",4,0.1,5)
> # DESIGN   ETMX_M0_DAMP_L 3 resgain(0.43,5,4)resgain(0.99,5,4)resgain(1.98,5,4)resgain(3.4,5,4)
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 245257 May 10 03:56 H1SUSETMX_1083754591.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
< # DESIGN   ETMX_M0_DAMP_L 2 butter("BandPass",4,0.1,5)
< # DESIGN   ETMX_M0_DAMP_L 3 resgain(0.43,5,4)resgain(0.99,5,4)resgain(1.98,5,4)resgain(3.4,5,4)
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 249180 May 12 10:15 H1SUSETMX_1083950161.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 4 zpk([0.831329491504266+i*0.9012257170546942;0.831329491504266-i*0.9012257170546942; 
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 5 zpk([0.04309093963845343+i*0.3314665390167811;0.04309093963845343-i*0.3314665390167811; 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 5 zpk([0.04309093963816393+i*0.3314665390167811;0.04309093963816393-i*0.3314665390167811; 
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 6 zpk([0.3079048233615395;0.4191165225355606], 
> # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2Y 6 zpk([0.3079048301514328;0.4191165157450882], 
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 245252 May 12 10:26 H1SUSETMX_1083950783.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 4 zpk([0.831329491504266+i*0.9012257170546942;0.831329491504266-i*0.9012257170546942; 
=====================================================
Date:
-rw-r--r--   1 controls controls 237890 May 12 10:36 H1SUSETMX_1083951424.txt
-----------------------------------------------------
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 0 zpk([0.831329491504266+i*0.9012257170546942;0.831329491504266-i*0.9012257170546942; 
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 1 zpk([0.002485877643515575-i*0.3946128198094371;0.002485877643515575+i*0.3946128198094371; 
< # DESIGN   ETMX_L1_DRIVEALIGN_L2P 5 zpk([0.08374528339823091+i*0.2433218667356947;0.08374528339823091-i*0.2433218667356947; 

I've swapped the network connections for the DMT machines to a new switch as per WP4622, this is in part to make more room in the rack for additonal equipment.  As far as I can tell, it looks like everything still works...

no restarts reported.

Added a ZFL-500HLN amplifier to the ALS DIFF RF path.

We are investigating the Z to RZ couplings that are currently limiting our ability to improve the Yaw isolation.

A measurement was performed on ITMY yesterdaty night. The unit was controlled with level 3 controlers and  high blend (T750mHz) in all 12 degrees of freedoms.

It has been driven at the Exc point of the Stage 1 Z isolation filter, therefore the drive was in [nm].  A white noise drive was used (filtered to put power on the low frequencies)

The plot attached shows the reponse of the inertial sensor. The top plot (Stage 1 T240s) are in [nm/s], [nrad/s] per unit of drive [nm]. The bottom plot (Stage 2 GS13s) are in [nm/s^3], [nrad/s^3] per unit of drive [nm].

The Z, RX, and RY response are as expected: slope goes as f, large main coupling,  cross coupling at sub-percent level...

X, and Y couplings are in high in the T240s, but suprinsingly the coherence is not very good.

As for RZ, which is the main focus of this measurement:

- the T240s show a 1/f slop that we assume is  due to magnetic couplings

- the GS13s shows the f^3 slope as expected, confirming the signal on the T240 is likely not real motion.

We have set up a measurement in the staging building to measure the direct coupling from one actuator to the T240s.

After Richard fixed the issue with the ETMX ESD (see alog 11573) this morning, I briefly took an angular transfer function of pitch and yaw using the oplev. They don't look crazy -- 1/f^2 shape and non-measurable crosscoupling between pitch and yaw. However there was a descrepancy from the model predictions by a factor of 2-ish. I am not sure what makes the descrepancy for the moment. The transfer functions are shown below with the models for comparison.

Anyway, the ESD is functional and ready to go.

Note that I included Jeff K's arc-integral-factor which gave an extra factor of 2/pi for the torque in the model. For those who are interested in the details of the calculation, please find it in the attachment (ESD_pitandyaw.m). The raw data are attached as well.