Looked at the connections to the H1 ITMX ESD starting at the airside of the vacuum feedthrough.  There is no evidence that there is any connection being made to ANYTHING inside the vacuum system.  In the process of analyzing this, I installed the Delrin insert on the airside of the vacuum feedthrough and very carefully connected the coaxial cables.  Truly no way it's connected on the inside of the vacuum flange.

(Alexa, Stefan)

• This morning we had noticed a swap in QPD A and B between in-vac and the medm screens/front end. This was due to swapped cables from the isc whitening chassis to the AA chassis (in particular cable 11, 12).  The cables are now properly connected.
• When we shined a flashlight onto the DCPDs on ISCTEX, the readouts were all mixed up. First, we noticed that the cables inside the table to the feedthrough were swapped between the Laser-IR and the Fiber Trans. We also noticed that fiber trans and rejected where swapped between channels in the system manager. This has all been corrected for. The DCPDs now follow the specifications of T1100472-v11 from feedthrough through to the software (ie: Laser-IR: 1, Fiber Rejected: 2, Fiber Trans, 3, Spare: 4).
• The BBPDs on the table were checked and are OK
• We measured the 532nm polarization to be s-pol at the bottom of the persiscope.

Chris and Dave, WP#4269

We modified the ISC models to add requested channels to the science frame. The following models were modified, compiled, installed and committed to the svn repository. We have not loaded any of the new code onto the front ends, we are waiting for a break in ISC EX commissioning to schedule this.

Summary: Some optic(s) might have moved after the TMS was moved out of the lab.

After the beam centering on QPDs is engaged, the QPDs were nicely centered but the beam spot on the 2ndary was about 3mm off centered to the left, the beam is clipped on the F2 already, and only half or less of the beam makes it to the ETM.

If the TMS ISC table is as was adjusted in the lab, the beam spot should be slightly to the right and a few mm down (https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=7285), so there's a huge difference between what we expect and what we are observing now. There are two possibilities:

• We're fooling ourselves, e.g. QPD is looking at a ghost beam, imbalanced analog gain between quadrants etc.
• One or more optics moved on the TMS ISC table, e.g. something was loose, somebody bumped on the mirror holder etc.

In the latter case we somehow need to realign the green and IR beam to the telescope and recenter the green and red QPDs, all in situ. I'm working on a procedure to do this.

Checking that we're not fooling ourselves.

Sensing electronics offset? -> Exonerated (changing whitening gain didn't change the beam position though it increased the QPD signal)

Beam clipping downstream of Mad City Labs PZTs? -> Exonerated. No clipping in chamber, and the beam looks OK in chamber.

Different gains for quadrants? -> Asked Stefan to check by bringing the beam in one quadrant, one by one.

Ghost beam?

Wrong polarization (which might produce strong ghost beams)?

Identifying what moved and why.

We don't have any good idea to pinpoint what moved except that it should be downstream of the first steering mirror, and either upstream of the secondary or in the QPD path. Optics mounted at the edge of the table are more likely to be bumped.

Loose mount? -> Exonerated. Wiggled all relevant optics (except the fixed top periscope mirror on the TMS ISC table, which I overlooked and should be checked later) by touching the barrel of the mirrors using fingers, but after each attempt the beam position didn't change.

Bumping? -> Not fully rejected. I didn't apply strong pressure nor any strong impact to optics, so bumping-strongly theory is still alive.

Drift? -> Not that likely. We have observed during HIFO-Y a huge alignment drift correlated with ambient temperature (triggered by clean room on/off) and nobody knows why this happens. But at that time we were probably talking about the radius of ITM over 4km = 17cm/4km ~ 40urad drift, while this time it is 3mm on the TMS ISC table, so it's on the order of a few mrad. This is a much larger effect than the drift in the past.

Outdoor GFCI receptacle nuisance tripping -> Will try different power source tomorrow

Work @ GV6 now complete

TF's on ITMX ISI, should finish up ~midnight. SUS can start their measurements after that. There's a light at the end of the tunnel somewhere around here, let's hope it's not an oncoming train.

• Pitch: 976 µrad down
  • Target: 971 µrad down (619 µrad optic pitch + 352 µrad FC correction)
  • Error: 5 µrad down
  • Tolerance: ±50 µrad

Jeff, Jim, Dave

Jeff found that we had not upgraded the end station sus models (quad, tms and aux) to matlab2012b on monday. He did the upgrade, we compiled, installed and restarted the models:

h1susetm[x,y],h1sustms[x,y],h1susauxe[x,y]

Prior to this change the end stations were running 2010a top level mdl files (and 2012b common models) built with 2.8. As expected, no DAQ restart was required as INI files did not change.

WHAM6's doors were removed and the ISI was locked this morning.  The ~800lbs of dummy mass on the Optical Table was then removed to make way for OMC works.

I have created a new CDS overview MEDM screen. Changes are:

added new h1tcscs model to h1oaf0.

added place holder for h1oaf model on h1oaf0

greyed out the TIM error bit on h1ioppemmx's state-word. We are running h1pemmx without an IRIGB card so this bit is permanently set.

Daniel requested I add the full set of Beckhoff PLC1 channels in the MSR to the frame. I had been acquiring a small subset of these defined in the ini files:

H1EDCU_PSLENV.ini

H1EDCU_ECATPEM.ini

H1EDCU_TIMING.ini

These were removed from the daq master and replaced with a new

H1EDCU_ECATC1PLC1.ini

I modified the file to set acquire=3 so channels go both into the full and science frames.

At 12:42 I restarted the DAQ. The EDCU channel count increased from 3,656 to 17,237.

The full frame size increased from 444M to 448M, the science frame increased from 232M to 237M.

ETMX transfer functions Phase 3a after 2nd round of alignment yesterday (cf alog 8503 and 8525) have succesfully been completed, and they show an excellent agreement with the previous measurements taken after the first alignment.

Results attached are described below

(1) M0-M0 undamped TF comparison with the model

(2) R0-R0 undamped TF comparison with the model

(3) M0-M0 undamped TF comparison with the first phase 3a measurement, and the model

(4) R0-R0 undamped TF comparison with the first phase 3a measurement, and the model

Data results and scripts have been commited to the svn

J. Kissel, A. Pele

Though Arnaud had posted a few of the pictures from our B&K hammering session of ITMX in BSC3 (see LHO aLOG 8497), I post the rest here because I got more pictures that are not necessarily B&K related. I attach four .pdf albums, captioned below; along with a few of the best publicity photos attached in raw form.

2013-11-13_BSC3Cabling.pdf
-  Nothing to be alarmed by here, but I noticed that tons of cabling were draped from ST0 of ISI-ITMX to their respective feedthroughs in rather hap-hazard ways, and I was worry about potential shorting of isolation between the suspended payload of HEPI and the Chamber. I mentioned this to Jim, and he quickly assured me that the cables are still in a transient state, and will most certainly be cleaned up before the chamber is closed up. I merely post for posterity, so we (i.e. not just folks in SEI) remember what *not* to do.

2013-11-13_BnKHammering.pdf
- Just a few more pictures from the B&K hammering session, indicating where I was hitting and a few action shots. As I said, Arnaud has posted most of these already in LHO aLOG 8497.

2013-11-13_ITMXPublicityPhotos.pdf
- It's always good to get some shots that can be later used for posters and talks. Here's a fashion show of H1 SUS ITMX.

2013-11-13_IXArmCavityBaffle.pdf
- A couple of things to note here:
(1) The first two pages show just how incredibly close the ACB is to the QUAD structure as a result of the move decreed by IAS. In page two I'm trying to hold up a 3/16ths allen key up for perspective, but it didn't work out so well. I would estimate the gap at-closest-approach is no more that 5 [mm]. It just gives me the willies. Especially since I gave the ACB a few milli-Jeffs of calibrated excitation, and it started waggling with reasonably high Q at ~5-10 [Hz]. Is the fundamental resonance of this suspension really that stiff / high-in-frequency? Hurumph.
(2) This is the first time I've seen the suspension system up-close and personally, so I wanted to get some good shots of it. Very interesting design...
(3) There's still some tooling lying around on the baffle itself. We should make sure to grab these before chamber close-out.

Gerardo and Gerardo Jr. are bonding ears to PUM-ETM06.  As of yesterday 1 ear had been bonded.