"Quick" circular AMP connectors had been added to this gauge pair wiring to facilitated disconnection/connection without the need to access the wiring terminations at the gauges themselves.  I suspect a voltage drop across this additional connection accounts for the apparent signal error.  Accessibility is not good to correct -> will live with this until opportunity to correct presents itself

During the last suspension model updates, many SUS models started reporting some additional status bits. I did a first round of cleanup of the overview screens to show all bits.
- fixed the number of bits and the mask names in a series of model specific ODC screens.
- ODC overview screen update:  fixed the numer of bits and switched to the _LATCH version of the ODC channel ( this channel latches for 1 sec.)
- set the bit mask for all SUS and SEI models.

Still to do: 
- number of bits for the BS is different than ITMs - it needs it's own BSC screen
- set the string bit label s
- update IMC model
- in collaboration with SEI: the ISI scripts currently incorrectly set he desired state channels.

A set of matlab transfer functions has been ran on the TMSX this afternoon after BSC9 was closed out, and while the ISI was damped. The pitch degree of freedom shows some excess noise between 0.7Hz and 3Hz, which is something I was not expecting to see since the measurement after the last work accomplished on TMSX was clean.

It might be related to some excess motion at the time of the measurement during the afternoon, which I will check by running undamped and damped TFs overnight in a quiter environment. We will see how repeatable the measurement is tomorrow morning.

It might also be the position of the cables that could have changed by themselves because of their weight. Or maybe some work that I'm not aware of that was done after the last measurement taken. In those cases we would probably need to physically check what is going on.

Results attached are described below :

(1) Comparison between the model and last TMSX TF

(2) Comparison between TMSX after the work done on Nov 20th (Orange trace), after the last time work has been done on Nov 22nd (black trace), and today (pink trace).

See the 5th page of (1) and (2) for the pitch dof

I am leaving the IMC locked for the night in order to see its stability. The ASC loops are all engaged.

It must be rock-solid because we fixed the EOM !!

An auto-locking script is locally running on opsws4. The script itself resides in /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/ioo/h1/scripts/imc/sballmer/ and it is called MClockwatch.

The PSL enclosure is now back in science mode. PMC/FSS/ISS are running fine.

Hugh noticed that some HEPI ITMY slow channels were not correct in the DAQ. I did some investigation and found:

Of the slow channels (datarate=16) in H1ISIITMY.ini :

channels associated with the FEC were correct

channels associated with Filter Modules were correct

other slow channels were incorrect, either showing zero or other data (like channel hopping)

Fast channels appear to be OK (within the limited sample I used)

The problem is not seen with HEPI BS or ETMX. Looking at the models they all look identical.

Reboot/Restarts:

I first restarted h1hpiitmy. Then tried restarting all models on h1seib1. Then tried a restart of the mx-streamers. Then recompiled and reinstalled the h1hpiitmy model and restarted it, followed by a DAQ restart (DAQ status was good, so this should have been unnecessary). All to no avail.

The only thing I haven't done is reboot the computer.

It appears this problem appeared when we upgraded to RCG2.8 on Tue 12 November.

CP3 alarmed, appears to have been filled
Cleaning at end Y
Apollo torqueing bolts at end X
Corner Station chiller 2 tripped, restarted by Ski

08:52 Joe and Gerardo swapping PSL light pipe shutter
09:05 Filiberto to look at end X transmon cabling
09:39 Joe and Gerardo done swapping PSL light pipe shutter
10:02 Sheila removing beam block from PSL table
10:34 Hugh reports that the corner station HEPI pumps tripped off early this morning
10:51 Dave, Kiwamu restarting H1 LSC model, DAQ restart
10:56 DAQ restart
11:16 Hugh modifying corner station HEPI pump controller (WP 4325)
11:19 Dave restarting all models on H1 ISC EY
13:02 Thomas V. working on ITMX optical lever enclosure/bellows
13:08 Safety inspection walking through the LVEA
13:28 Gerardo to LVEA to find Thomas V.
14:16 Arnaud running transfer functions on TMSX
14:17 Apollo removed dome and north door from BSC 10 (WP 4326)
15:22 Jeff K., Sheila and Arnaud purposely tripping chamber watchdogs
15:23 Hugh done modifying corner station HEPI pump controller (WP 4325)
15:36 Gerardo and Thomas V. done with optical lever enclosure/bellows

Last night the power watchdog on the PSL tripped again.  I turned the last back on this morning after the shutter was installed. 

Note:  this morning I transitioned to science mode, then stefan and I reentered to make a measurement of the modulation depth with the OSA.  When I transitioned back to commisioning mode I forgot to turn the AC on, so there was probably quite a temperature fluctuation.  Now the psl is in commisioning mode.

Since the PSL is at least working reasonably now I updated safe.snaps for the iss, fss, and pmc. 

Kyle, Gerardo 

Replaced (2) each 1 1/2" check valves, (2) each  3/4" check valves, (2) each exhaust air valves + actuators, left and right tower desiccant (175lbs/tower 1/8" alumina) and the two nearest downstream filter elements.  The (2) large air valves which supply the towers during the "drying" cycle are also nearly wore out and will need replacing at the next service interval. 

Kyle, John 

As alumina dust had been generated and had been visible in the 1st downstream filter element, we made rudimentary particulate measurements from the 80 psi air (before 1 psi regulator) sampled between filter stages 3 and 4.  

For comparison, we routed nitrogen from a UHP N2 bottle+regulator via 8' of 1/2" poly tube through a 0-5 GPM (liquid) rotameter which exausted into one end of a flow box.  A particle counter was placed inside of the flow box near the opposite end.  

2 GPM indicated flow    Bottled UHP N2      sampled air 
                                     260,000 0.3u        45,000 0.3u 
                                       17,000 0.5u        12,000 0.5u 
 
3 GPM indicated flow    750,000 0.3u        50,000 0.3u 
                                       23,000 0.5u        13,000 0.5u 

30 minutes after routing the purge air supply to the LVEA Class 100 manifolds I moved the flow box apparatus to the XBM purge air connection and measured: 
 
0.8 GPM indicated flow        200 0.3u 
                                             0.0 0.5u

Saw the corner station pump output at zero with max drive from controller.  This condition usually indicates a level trip.  At Pump Stations on mezzanine, indications confirm.  Plus when I attempted to restart, it tripped again from fluid level so I conclude it was a level trip fault.  I lowered the trip point to compensate.  There is only about 3/4" more this can be done.  Why...colder temps? Nah, likely a pretty small effect, air bubbles working there way out?  Probably some of that going on; if it comes out of the LVEA plumbing, it can be released in the reservoir tank.  Leaks?! There are some minor leaks from two of the pumps but these are a drip or two a day kinda leaks, certainly contribute though.  Bottom, line, monitor the levels, clean up the leaks, fix the leaks, add fluid as needed.

I took the opportunity of the shut down to hardwire the FWD switch on the PS controller.  This is already the case at the End Stations.  Consequences: 1) After a shut down, there will be no need to open the panel to restart unless there is a fault to acknowledge on the controller.  This is good because access to the panel requires electrical checkout/approval from McCarthy or having McCarthy do it.  2) Restart will be abrupt if it is not brought up slowly (manually).  This could be bad as the HEPI may shake things around so please understand the process when you restart the system after shutdown.

(Joe, Gerardo)

PSL light pipe and shutter were removed from the chamber side (HAM01), the main PSL beam vieport was exposed to apply FC on it.  FC application (Joe used a small bottle) was finished by 4:10 PM yesterday, to protect the viewport we attached the old vieport adaptor with 3 screws to the viewport, and covered the 3" center hole with aluminum foil.
Work will continue today.

Stefan, Sheila and Kiwamu with remote assistance from Rich A. and Volker

The mysterious jump in the RF phase (see alog 7941) is now understood and fixed. It was due to a loose connection at DB15 connectors in the EOM box and not due to the SMA connector (see alog 8811 and 8813 for our early detective story). We applied two small in-situ modifications on the EOM box. As a result, now it doesn't show the mysterious RF jump any more.

The box:

I briefly explain the EOM box for those who are not familiar with our custom-made EOM box. The EOM box consists of two boxes -- one contains LC resonant circuits and the other contains the EOM crystal. This two-boxes-design allows one to tune the resonant frequencies by tweaking the LC circuits without messing up the alignment of the EOM crystal because one can simply take out the electronics box and leave the crystal box for solder or tuning some parts in the circuits. To apply voltage across the EOM crystal for normal operation, the LC circuits need to be connected to the EOM crystal. This is done by a DB15 connector attached on each box -- female DB15 on the crystal box and a male DB15 on the electronics box (see pictures shown below). In this way, the two boxes are electrically connected.

A picture of the actual EOM box. The gloved hand is me pressing the SMA downward in order to reproduce the RF jump.

When I pressed the SMA connectors downward in this morning, the RF characteristic of the EOM box changed as if something jumped. This was repeatable, although it seemed that the condition to make it jump was random -- occasionally, pressing the SMA didn't make it jump and sometime pushing the SMA toward the box made it jump. Anyways, at this point, it was clear that the EOM box was the culprit and not the RF cables.

The causes:

• The mechanical connection between the two boxes was not solid.
• The DB15 connectors were not completely all the way in.
• The above two facts resulted in different amount of stray capacitance in the DB15 connectors depending on the relative orientation of the two boxes.
• Though, this doesn't explain the bi-stable impedance modes we have observed. Maybe there was some sort of bi-stable condition in the physical orientations.

At the beginning, we thought the culprit was the SMA connectors (see alog 8811 and 8813). However, this turned out to be wrong as we investigated it further. With a remote assistance from Volker, Stefan and I took the electronics box apart from the crystal box while keeping the crystal alignment. In the process of removal, we found that the electronics box was attached to the crystal box merely by friction of the DB15 connectors and three pieces of adhesive tape. So the orientation of the electronics box was not so solid with respect the EOM box. We then checked the return loss of the LC circuits without connecting the EOM and confirmed that wiggling the SMA connector didn't change its impedance. Instead, we discovered that the DB15 connector can easily change the amount of its stray capacitance -- the frequency of the resonant notch could shift by approximately 1 MHz by very gently touching the DB15 connector with our latex-gloved-hand. We put the electronics box back on the EOM crystal box and wiggled the orientation of them. Indeed, it changed the resonant frequency by about 1 MHz in a discontinuous way. So we determined that the loose connection in the DB15 connectors was the culprit and the mysterious RF jump was induced by some change in the orientation of the two boxes.

It seemed that the DB15 connectors were not all the way in because the two aluminum boxes contacted first.

The repair/modification fixed the issue:

We did the following two repair/modification:

• We put washers in the DB15 connector of the electronics box to make the connector stick out a bit more.
• We introduced four screws to mechanically tighten the connection between two boxes.

The DB15 connector have two screws to support it and we put a washer for each screw. They raise the height of the DB15 connector like shims. Also, we newly installed four screws to make the connection of the two boxes more solid. There were already four screw holes on each box to accommodate them. So we just installed them. After these modifications, we checked the return loss of all three RF ports. We didn't observe the mysterious jump at all, even when the electronics box was wiggled hard. Of course, strongly pressing the electronics box downward shifts the notch position by an order of 10 kHz due to the change in the stray capacitance at the DB15 connectors, but the shift is smooth and not in a discontinuous way any more. So the RF jump issue is now solved.

A picture of the electronics box when apart from the EOM crystal box. This DB15 connector was shimmed by washers.

A picture of the EOM crystal box when the electronics box is taken away. There is a threaded screw hole on each corner and these are the ones we used for installing the new screws.

A top view of the EOM box with the lid off. The green circles indicate the screws that we newly installed.

A top view of the EOM box with the lid off. The green circles indicate the screws that we newly installed.

Steps taken to commission the ITMY ring heater pair:
- Updated to the recently committed Beckhoff code that Joe B and Adam M worked on yesterday.
- Added the calibration values that Aidan B had recommended for running the ring heaters.
- Opened up a strip tool to monitor the vacuum pressure with the closest gauge (HVE-LY:Y1_120BTORR)
- Turned the ring heaters on to low power (~.01 Watts) to make sure that the channels were working properly
- Increased the power to 1 Watt for a 4 hour period starting at 12:00PM Pacific Time, keeping an eye on the pressure gauge previously mentioned.


Upper:
Requested Power = 1.00 Watts
Measured Voltage = 5.94 Volts
Measured Current = 0.17 Amps 
Calculated Power = .99 Watts
Calculated Resistance = 34.94 Ohms

Lower:
Requested Power = 1.00 Watts
Measured Voltage = 5.92 Volts
Measured Current = 0.16 Amps 
Calculated Power = .98 Watts
Calculated Resistance = 37.0 Ohms

A four hour trend of the pressure gauge and ring heater settings is attached.

A quick, back-of-the-envelope calculations shows that the ring heaters are working properly. The next step for measuring the thermal lensing would be to measure the beam diameter of a single reflection off of the back of ITMX independently and then changing the radius of curvature of ITMY using the ring heater to match. This requires looking at the REFL beam either in the HAM1 chamber or on the ISCT1 table, depending on how much power we are able to get out of REFL.  The Thorlabs beam profile we have on site requires a minimum of ~1e-5 Watts of incident beam power to function.

J. Kissel, T. Vo

Because of the recent resonant features seen in ISI-ITMX that seemed to have been fixed by a simple lock and unlock of the ITMX Arm Cavity Baffle (see LHO aLOG 8632), I asked "has anyone ever taken B&K hammer transfer functions of the ACB?" The answer was a resoundingly loud "no" (I am Jack's complete lack of surprise). Me and my big mouth volunteered to do it, and there was a tiny window of opportunity before Thomas cleaned up the chamber, so Thomas and I pioneered the first B&K measurements of the ITM ACB. Details of the measurement setup and execution below.

Again, I don't know how to properly export the data (as indicated in LHO aLOG 8654), so you'll have to be patient regarding the results. Note that obtaining official plots of the results should not in any way be considered as a hold-up for chamber close out.

Of course, after taking the measurements and cleaning up the chamber -- because we *touched* the baffle -- we had Sebastien run a quick set of ISI-ITMX transfer functions, and it informed us we're not-at-all done battling this bumbling oaf of a baffle (see LHO aLOG 8653). This should be considered a hold-up for chamber close out. Round three, first thing tomorrow!

-----------
Details:
We took two distinct measurements: 
(1) With the accelerometer on the suspended baffle itself, using a unused slotted bolt hole in the inside middle, closest to the ITM HR surface. This test was just a shot in the dark, to see if we could get a nice driven transfer function of the suspended stage, since there have been no prior attempts with this generation of the ACB baffle. At first glance from the B&K software plots, it looks like a complete mess, so it will most likely either be a completely confusing / useless or completely depressing result.

DSCN0206.jpg (or pg 3 of the .pdf) shows a picture of the accelerometer from inside the baffle looking out back toward ITMX. As is (hopefully) resolvable in the picture, ACC +X = ITMX -L, ACC +Y = ITMX -T, ACC +Z = ITMX +V. The Y impact was on the (ITMX) +T face, bottom corner, closest to the ITM, in the (ITMX) -T direction. The X impact was along the bottom edge of the (ITMX) -L face, in the +L direction.

(2) With the accelerometer on the bottom of the support structure's tube (shown in DSCN0209.jpg). One can't see it in the picture, but the accelerometers axes were aligned with the global IFO's axes, such that ACC +X = Points down X arm towards ETMX, ACC +Y = Points down the Y Arm towards ETMY, and ACC +Z = Points up with local gravity (the same as ITMX's +V). The X & Y impacts were made towards the bottom of the outer, support structure, "eddy current damping 8 dia," tube (D1002564, of the assembly D1200275). Man, that thing rung like a bell when Thomas whacked it...

The files live on the B&K laptop only, in
C:Users\ligo\Desktop\SUS Hammer Test\ITMX\BandK\
and are called
(1x) SimpleHammerDisplay3-ArmCavityBaffleBaffle-ISIfloating-SuspendedElements_Ximpact.pls
(1y) SimpleHammerDisplay3-ArmCavityBaffleBaffle-ISIfloating-SuspendedElements_Yimpact.pls
(2x) SimpleHammerDisplay3-ArmCavityBaffleBaffle-ISIfloating-StructuralElements_Ximpact.pls
(2y) SimpleHammerDisplay3-ArmCavityBaffleBaffle-ISIfloating-StructuralElements_Yimpact.pls

J. Kissel, C. Vorvick

Calum and Betsy installed the new PR3 baffles (D1300957) yesterday (see LHO aLOG 8619), but only roughed in their alignment with respect to the optic / prisms / wires. Today Cheryl and I went into HAM2, and I aligned the baffles to-the-best-of-my-ability, by-eye, and then tool tightened them to PR3 HLTS structure. My left-right metric was "just covering the edge of the bevel on the optic with the straight portion of the baffles" and my up-down metric was having the "bottom curves of the baffles following the curvature / bevel of the lower half of the optic."  It was certainly a ball-park activity, given that the goodness of alignment depends heavily on one's angle, orientation, and height of viewing. From most face-on views, however, the baffle looks to be baffling the wires and not clipping the optic.

I took many pictures, but did not find out until later that the memory card on the camera was full, so the pictures were not being stored and lost. FFFFUUUUDDDGGEEEE. 
Cheryl, Calum, Betsy, and Kate have graciously volunteered to retake pictures tomorrow before / after they pull of the first contact on all the optics.

We also took B&K hammer transfer functions after securing the baffles (with PR3 freely suspended, and the ISI Locked, and probably with me leaning on the table). I placed the accelerometer in the exact same location and configuration as in LHO aLOG 6014, (4th picture attached) with ACC +X = PR3 -L, ACC +Y = PR3 -T, and ACC +Z = PR3 +V, in the upper left corner of the cage on the HR face, "front" of the cage. The X impacts with the hammer were just below the accelerometer, on the HR face. The Y impacts were on that same strut / corner, at the same height as the accelerometer, on the -T face of the cage, in the +T direction. Comparing these results with the previous results taken before the baffles were installed -- by-eye they look roughly equivalent. The resident LHO expert of post-processing the data is off to LLO for a few days, so we'll post a comparison next week (or I can ask Calum / Stuart tomorrow, we'll see.)

For now, the saved templates live only on the laptop, and live in
C:\Users\ligo\Desktop\SUS Hammer Test\PR3
and are called
SimpleHammerDisplay3-PR3Baffle-ISIlocked-Ximpact.pls
SimpleHammerDisplay3-PR3Baffle-ISIlocked-Yimpact.pls

(Alexa, Sheila)

I am still puzzled by some of the mode matching measurements I took of ISCTEY. I had attemped to compare the accuracy of the Mode Master, Nanoscan, and Knife edge. They seem to approximately agree, but it's hard to say which is most accurate.

Regardless...I examined the beam profile exiting the table enclosure with all the lenses in place using the Mode Master. Refering to D1100607-v13, I found the optimal placement of the telescope to be: ALS-L6 13.5 inches from ALS-M9, ALS-L7 6 inches from ALS-M10. With an "a la mode" script, I determined the mode matching overlap with the TransMon secondary mirror to be 87% for the horizontal profile and 98.6% for the vertical profile. This overlap was computed with a 2.2mm waist at 3.5m from ALS-M11. The waist size and location was determined via T1200200-v1, D0902163, D1201457 as done in the ISCTEX MM alog with a correction of 4ft for the panel location change between EX and EY.

I have attached the scripts and MM snap shot. Note: the first matlab script is just the profile taken by the MM after the telescope, along with the overlap computation. The second script contains the full profile of ISCTEY, which is where some of my confusion persists.