JimW GregG HEPI actuator attachment started today at BSC9. Jim and I were able to get all of the vertical actuators attached with very little movement on the system so far. However, the vertical actuators are still locked and any moves to HEPI should be avoided until the install is finished.
• Moving ISCT EX table from LVEA to air lock at end x -> Apollo • The dust monitor (unit#3) that was in the "beer garden" has been moved to the East door side of the BSC3 cleanroom -> Richard • Site fumigation -> Sprague • Installing cables into HAM 5 and 6 IO chassis -> Aaron • The front end computer was powered down to allow EE work on the IO Chassis of h1sush56 -> David
Alog from yesterday. Did in-rack cabling for the STS-2 Seismometer Distribution Chassis for BSC1, BSC2 and BSC3. Each distribution chassis fans out to the HAM ISI chambers (HAM2-HAM6). The following schematics were used for reference: D0901301, D1000298, D1101576, and D1101584. See attached for the physical location of each seismometer. Filiberto Clara
to permit EE work on the IO Chassis of h1sush56 the front end computer was powered down at 13:47 and back up at 14:26 (PDT) when the work was completed.
Clipping problems encountered in the PRC at LLO have led to the discovery that the PRC scraper baffle "Z Plates" were built with an aperture approximately 0.75" too small. The PR2 scraper baffle assembly installed in H1 will require removal and re-work. For more detail please see the following link to the LLO log. https://alog.ligo-la.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=9200
For the record, Richard is moving the dust monitor that was in the "beer garden" to the East door side of the BSC3 cleanroom. Data drops and high alarm levels will be seen this morning during the move.
This is unit "#3"
Richard said he moved '5' back outside of the clean room into the beer garden. '3' came from where the LVEA test stand was.
[Mark Arnaud]
Results of ETMX M0 and R0 phase 3a (in chamber, in air) transfer functions from yesterday night have been processed and are plotted in the attached documents.
(1) Comparison between undamped M0 TF and model
(2) Comparison between undamped R0 TF and model
(3) Comparison between undamped M0 TF LHO phase 3a (in chamber), phase 2c, and LLO phase 2c
Main chain of ETMX is matching well the model cf (1), meaning it was freely suspended during the alignment (cf 8126). Only two modes of pitch are shifted down, which is a feature we already saw previously (cf (2) and alog 7415)
R0 measurements are not matching the model as well as M0, meaning something might be rubbing. Transverse and yaw degrees of freedom are very noisy. It makes sense for yaw, since the watchdog tripped when it was beeing driven, although it is not clear yet for transverse cf (2). It could be an issue in the actuation chain and I will take a closer look tomorrow.
In the process of adding subsystem links to the ODC channels I came across some inconsistencies in the medm macro files: ISI: there exist currently /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isibs_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isietmx_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isietmy_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isiham2_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isiham3_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isiham4_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isiham5_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isiham6_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isiitmx_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/common/medm/isiitmy_overview_macro.txt and /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/bscisi/isibs_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/bscisi/isietmx_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/bscisi/isiitmx_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/bscisi/isiitmy_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/bscisi/isitst_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/hamisi/isiham2_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/hamisi/isiham3_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/hamisi/isiham4_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/hamisi/isiham5_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/hamisi/isiham6_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/h1/medm/hepi/hepiham1_overview_macro.txt and /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/bscisi/L1_isibs_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/bscisi/L1_isietmx_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/bscisi/L1_isietmy_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/bscisi/L1_isiitmx_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/bscisi/L1_isiitmy_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/hamisi/L1_isiham2_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/hamisi/L1_isiham3_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/hamisi/L1_isiham4_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/hamisi/L1_isiham5_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isi/l1/medm/hamisi/L1_isiham6_overview_macro.txt more that 1) h1 and l1 files are named differently and 2) some common files exist SEI needs to sort out which ones we need to use Also, for HPI, there exist: /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/h1/medm/hepi/hepibs_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/h1/medm/hepi/hepiham1_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/h1/medm/hepi/hepiham2_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/h1/medm/hepi/hepiham3_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/h1/medm/hepi/hepiham4_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/h1/medm/hepi/hepiham5_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/h1/medm/hepi/hepiham6_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/h1/medm/hepi/hepiitmy_overview_macro.txt and /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpibs_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpietmx_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpietmy_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpiham1_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpiham2_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpiham3_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpiham4_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpiham5_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpiham6_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpiitmx_overview_macro.txt /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/hpi/l1/medm/hepitemplate/L1_hpiitmy_overview_macro.txt Note that 1) they have different name structures at the different sites 2) not all files exist for hanford 3) they are in different sub-directories ======================== I plead for standardization and sanity!
As far as I know, the reason why we have site specific safe.snap is due to Livingston inconsistency with the design wiring diagram. It is on the to-do list.
Today, during our contamination control discussions, Gerardo discovered that the X-beam tube manifold purge valve was still closed. He opened it and the BSC3 soft cover showed sights of life billowing outward a bit. So, it seems that since the vent ~10 days ago, we have only had the MC purge enabled which was not enough to supply positive pressure to all of the vented volume. Darn.
To improve hampered HEPA flow at the BSC3 entrance (the walking plates almost completely occult the line-of-sight to the cleanroom ceiling HEPAs), I have set the draw fan previously used in chamber cleaning near the front of the chamber door through the soft wall curtains. I have not turned it on because I am waiting for a particle counter to magically appear near the door to monitor the dust level (ehem, also ~10 days late).
ITMY now has two HEPI controllers installed (both of which work I think)
Control Level one is a positon sensor only ~5Hz UUG in all DOF (VP and HP are AC coupled at some low frequency (<1mhz))
Control Level two, uses the second set of blend filters (lil bit iso) just the second button and has ~10Hz UUG (5Hz for VP and HP)
It blends X,Y Z and rZ at about 0.5Hz and rX and rY at about 0.8Hz
I tried to design with minimum gain peaking every where (< a factor of two if you believe linear control theory, which HEPI doesn't always)
I characterized this controller in /ligo/svncommon/Seisvn/seismic/HEPI/H1/ITMY/Data/Spectra/Preformance_A.xml
There are three screen shots from this dtt attached, the Ref plots are with HEPI controls ON
The orange like color and green are the ISI stage 1 T240 modal signals HEPI on/off
The pinkish or grey and blue are the HEPI L4C signals on/off
red and pinkish are sts2 ground signals during the two tests
I don't really believe all of that isolation in the rotational directions, not sure why it is there .....
**** the HEPI on script doesn't seem to be working so well hopefully this will get fixed soon ****
~ 09:00 - 11:00 Thomas and Gerardo working on baffle installation in BSC3 Dave restarted the models and IOP on H1SUSH34 Roofing and insulation removal continuing
The final dial indicator values for those values.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| X | 0.532 | -- | -- | 0.623 |
| Y | 0.203 | 0.329 | 0.636 | 0.542 |
| Z | 0.419 | 0.430 | 0.406 | 0.474 |
(Corner 4 X value is so different because I was reading the dial indicator differently, it didn't actually change that much.)
Greg and I also did a quick measurement of the level after alignment. I didn't try to calculate a height, but the table is level to within .010" over the span of the optical table, with 3 of 4 corners being more like .005" difference. This agrees with the spec used for the test stands, so I assume this is good enough.
Over the last few days I've been taking some passive noise spectra of the ISI-CPS on HAM6 to try and determine what the best grounding strategy is (Jeff made a nice cartoon of the options in T1300871).
Along the way I found out a few things
1) The HAM 6 CPSs had two problems that canceled each other out
There as a master in each crate (the box near the chamber that hold the CPS controllers)
and the cable which brings the sync signal from the power board was either bad or plugged in backwards (it isn't keyed)
I tunred one of the masters into a slave and replaced the cable
2) All of the racks that I have tested have there chasis grounded, so placing them on a cable tray creates a ground and possible ground loop.
3) Currently it is pretty likely that ALL of the CPS that are installed have grounds in the electroncs room rack AND at the chamber (Ground Loop Gaore)
4) The resistance to ground from the power cable ground to the chamber is 0.6ohms
5) the sync cable carries a ground from one rack to the next
After fixing the problems I took spectra under three conditions
Multiple grounds (electroncs room and chamber) these were bad
Single ground in the electronics room, red and green lines in the attached png (clean room on/off are the differences)
Single ground at the chamber, blue lines in the attached png
Given that set of data i think that we should plan on converting to a single ground at the chamber.
The attached pdf shows one spectra converted to m/rthz and the expected noise (we have measured something close to the expected noise on the bench for every unit in use)
I don't really know what to say about this except yuck
I left the CPS on HAM6 with a signal ground (+) at from the electronics room, the boxes are not in contact with the cable trays, there is an extra ground which connects the two boxes via the sync cable
Both HAM2 and HAM3 chambers are now fully controlled (HEPI+ISI).
Those chambers feature:
- Standardized ISI damping loops (defined in: SeiSVN/seismic/HAM-ISI/H1/
- Standardized ISI blend filters (SeiSVN/seismic/HAM-ISI/Complementary_Filters_HAM_ISI/HAM-ISI_Generic_Comp_Filters.mat)
- Hybrid aLigo/eLigo blend filters are available (SeiSVN/seismic/HAM-ISI/Common/Blend_filters/Filters_HAM_ISI_Blend_Hybrid_24_Jul_2013.mat)
- All 3 levels of ISI isolation loops (UGF=10Hz, 25Hz, 35Hz - LHO aLog # 5355). Performance is mostly limited by the blend filters. Level 2 controllers give similar amount of isolation as Level 3. Level 2 controllers are prefferred for now - ISI Perfomance can be found in LHO aLog #7414
- HEPI position blend filters (IPS signals are multiplied by 1, L4C signals are multiplied by 0)
- HEPI position loops. UUG = 2 Hz. Should be set to 5Hz soon. HEPI position loops performance plots, and controllers, can be found in LHO aLog #8037.
Trun on Process:
Prepare:
Damp ISI:
Turn on HEPI:
Engage the isolation loops, on the ISI
I took performance spectra on the ISI, in air, earlier this week.
HEPI was running with 2Hz UUG IPS position loops. The ISI had Level 3 isolation loops running, with the hybrid aLigo + eLigo on RX/RY blend.
Performance plots are attached for reference.
Arnaud P. Betsy W. Did B&K hammer measurements on Friday feb 8th on the BeamSplitter that will be installed in BSC2. Config: BSC-ISI Unlocked, QUAD Unlocked, Baffles ON, Vibration Absorbers ON, Damping ON. Attached, pictures describing the position of hammer impacts, and accelerometer + corresponding pulse files.
Raw data has been exported from the B&K Pulse files, in accordance with the procedure outlined in the SUS Operations Manual (see How to do B&K Hammer Testing). Exported ASCII data files have been committed to the SUS svn at the following location, ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/BandK$, these files include the following (n.b. files have been renamed to comply with convention detailed in the Op's Manual) :- SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-Bottom-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Yimpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-Bottom-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Yimpact.txt SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-BottomLeft-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-BottomLeft-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.txt SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-BottomRight-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-BottomRight-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.txt SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopLeft-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopLeft-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.txt SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopLeft-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Yimpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopLeft-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Yimpact.txt SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopMiddle-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopMiddle-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.txt SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopMiddle-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Yimpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopMiddle-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Yimpact.txt SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopRight-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopRight-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Ximpact.txt SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopRight-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Yimpact.pls SimpleHammerDisplay3-BS-TopRight-SUSunlocked-ISIunlocked-VAfitted-Yimpact.txt The above B&K data has been processed using v12 of the "BandK_plot.m" Matlab script, available in the /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/Common/MatlabTools$ directory. The merged plot attached below shows:- pg1 - Y response of the structure to Y hammer impact excitations at various locations, from 1Hz to 400Hz. pg2 - X response of the structure to X hammer impact excitations at various locations, from 1Hz to 400Hz. pg3 - X response of the structure to X hammer impact excitations at various locations, ZOOMED IN from 50Hz to 400Hz. n.b. hammer impact locations are viewable in the attachment to the original aLOG entry above see "Hammer_Impacts.pdf".
For acceptance review, I reprocessed the data for the beamsplitter, after seeing a legend mismatch between the plotted results and the raw data from PULSE software.
Therefore the attached results below are the ones to look at, and are following the accelerometer axis convention represented on the last attachement
(1) BandK_results_X_Exc.pdf
(2) BandK_results_Y_Exc.pdf
(3) Picture of BS with axis convention and hammer impact location
The X and Y hits have been chosen to correspond to the "Top Middle" hits on the picture
Those results in X to X (blue of 1st pdf) and Y to Y (green of 2nd pdf) are not showing any high Q resonnances below 150Hz, meaning the vibration absorbers are working as expected, and the test passed succesfully.