Attached are plots of dust counts > .5 microns in particles per cubic foot. For yesterday I included a plot of the mode of the dust monitor put under the clean room over HAM3 (H0:PEM-LVEA_DST15_MODE) to show approximately when I moved it into there.
It turns out that somebody tripped on the fiber that runs from the PSL room to the patch panel before it was installed, so Richard and Filiberto put a new one in.
When connecting the new fiber to the fiber launcher in the PSL room, we got rid of APC-APC fiber and a long coil of APC-PC patch, and put in a shorter coil of APC-PC in place.
Upstream of the fiber launcher, the power was 3.2 mW, and about 1.8mW goes into the fiber. In the mass storage room, we're getting about 1mW, which is somewhat worse than before.
Anyway, we cannot test this configuration today as the PSL is still cooling down slowly. Tomorrow.
Tonight Vincent will run a long measurement for SEI.
At some stage in the morning, I, Rodica and Cheryl thought that Laser room was hot. We checked the Beckhoff temperature monitors which looked fine, but it was so hot that we convinced ourselves that the monitors are bogus (later it turned out that Beckhoff monitors that are reporting temperatures were all frozen).
The touch panel interface from AirCare Automation was reporting that the A/Cs were both running, but they were clearly not running. Toggling running/stop from the touch panel didn't change the situation, it would say that A/Cs were running but they were not.
While we were trying various things, the temperature was running up quickly and the PMC started dropping lock and relocking repeatedly with a few minutes' interval because the PMC temperature servo couldn't keep up.
After a while I noticed that there are good old hardware A/C control panels from Mitsubishi in the laser room, the sensors of these panels were reporting 28 degree C instead of 20, and an error message was on the display. I switched it off and on, and after a while we felt that the temperature was coming down.
The room temperature came back to normal after a few hours, but some things (e.g. PMC) is very slow to respond, and it's still going back to where it used to. Because of this, PMC servo is dropping lock once per 10 minutes or so as of now.
I disabled the temperature servo of PMC and leave it like that for tonight.
===
I wanted to see when exactly the room temperature started rising, but I couldn't because the Beckhoff monitors were all frozen from last Friday. But anyway it should have been me because I'm the only person who touched A/C.
===
One thing though, I was told to turn A/C on and off from AirCare touch panel, but Livingston manual says this is done from Mitsubishi control panel. If this should NOT be done from the touchpanel, fine, but the touchpanel should not pretend as if it can control and monitor the status of A/Cs.
It appears that the problem with the Beckhoff for the H1 PSL environment channels was that one of the chassis was turned off (H1 Corner 2 I think). I don't know when or why this happened.
I looked at some monitors that are sort of related to PSL room temperature and found that the most likely failure point was NOT when I turned everything off (except the make up air) and then back on with some reduced HEPA setting in the evening on Monday, but it was when I turned everything back on with full speed in the morning.
For record, last night I temporarily turned off HEPA and A/Cs, and reduced the make up air to 30%, for a short while.
In the same evening I turned A/C back on, and left PSL laser room HEPA off, set PSL ante room HEPA to 55% level, and Make up air to 75%.
The time this happened is shown as a pink line in the attached. As you can see, after this, because of reduced HEPA and make up air, the temperature very slowly dropped but nothing drastic happened. At some point the temperature servo for PMC bottomed out (see Ch1 and Ch2) but the PMC was still locked (Ch7). At this point A/Cs were most likely running fine.
This morning at about 10AM (Cyan line), before anybody went into the PSL room I made sure that everything was back to 100%. I set both of HEPAs to "100" more than once, as I thought the touch panel was displaying 100% even though it should be displaying 55% when I first saw the setting. I also toggled A/Cs to make sure that the touch panel display responds to my request to change A/C status, and made sure to go back again so that it was reporting "running" for both A/Cs.
Apparently the system didn't like it, PMC temperature started going up rapidly, PMC dropped lock, and the refcav transmission dropped drastically (Ch.4) probably because of the alignment drift caused by the temperature change.
The change in temperature was noticed by us, and at about noon A/Cs were turned on again via Mitsubishi control panel, so we were A/C-less for two hours.
It seems like the the alignment to the refcav never came back.
Today I pulled the ETM ring heater driver to investigate why its response to current was so different from the ITM ring heater driver. I found that resistor R44, which controls the gain of the input, was left void on the ETM. The circuit designs had been updated to include a 49.9k resistor, raising the gain by a factor of about 2. I added the 49.9k resistor, returned the ETM ring heater driver to the field, and recalibrated the driver. The calibration was performed by measuring the voltage over a 0.5 ohm resistor on the ring heater driver board (test points TP1 and TP2). The supplied current was increased from 0 to 425 "mA" of DC offset in steps of 25 "mA".
The driver's calibration is much closer to the ITM calibration, and is more consistent with using milliamps for the DC offset on the medm screen. Previously, it was calibrated at 0.0498 mA/ADC count. The updated calibration is 0.02396 mA/ADC count. The attached trace shows the data using the old calibration on the same axes as the data using the new calibration.
I edited the plot to make the axis labeling more transparent. The x-axis is the output on the channel H2:TCS-ETMY_RING_HTR_SEG2_I_MON_OUTPUT (what the MEDM screen thinks it's sending to the ring heater), the y-axis is the current calculated from the voltage measured over the sense resistor R49 on the driver.
Again, the board was modified to bring its gain in line with that of the ITM driver. The initial calibration was done for the unmodified board. The modified calibration is the correct calibration for the modified ETM driver.
This afternoon Andres and I checked MC2 for rubbing. We found the two left side (under BOSEM T1) Lower Blade Stops almost touching their respective blades. We backed both stops off to closer to the specified 0.75mm spacing. We also found the upper left EQ stop on the Bottom mass was lightly touching the glass, which we backed off. We checked the remaining EQ stops and adjusted as necessary. MC2 should be ready to continue testing.
Reportedly, Jeff and Andres went in and fixed some EQ stop rubbing on MC2 inside of HAM3 today. With this done, I will now attempt more TFs as part of the Phase 3a testing (while at LLO).
ScottL BubbaG & Hugh No issues with this. First locked up HEPI. Centering Pins in, Spring Locating Fixtures in place, Springs in place. Lift the Mass, position over Pins, lower to placement. Pull Centering Pins, replace with Safety Pins or Leg Screws, remove Locating Fixture. Next, repeat seven times. Couple things. The Viton cork Springs are considerably shorter so the Leg Screws, which prevent the Mass from flying off if the world turns upside down, are installed without the Custom Thick washer (D972716, 3/8"thick). See the first photo with a comparison. The Safety Pins D972715-5 into the Support Table are installed with a 0.089" thick vented washer although it really doesn't need it. We are ready to fly the Optical Table to the South Bay for install. Then payload up, level, check the height & horizontal alignment (IAS.) See the attached photos to experience a few of the thrills we had today!
Second cleaning was completed early this morning. Three doors and the dome were removed from the chamber by COB today.
- Quiet time after 03:00 PM - Kyle to crane flange assembly 09:31AM - Christina is cleaning HAM3 - Apollo replacing leg on the beam splitter test stand. - Dave is going to change some code to the SUSH2a IOP watchdog, needs a restart of the front end, awaiting Betsy (at LLO) to call.
Doors were taken off of HAM3 first thing this morning. I informed Jeff B. (SUS rubbing issues)and Kyle (conflat leaks) that the doors were off so that they could proceed with their work.
Cheryl, Rodica
On Monday we started aligning the TGG crystals inside the Faraday magnet, and found that we could not get the same rotation as at LLO. The single TGG crystal was rotating properly 22.5 deg, but the double crystal system was rotating the difference instead of sum of the individual rotations. We realized that the magnetic field orientation inside the magnet is OPPOSITE to the one in the LLO magnet, for the same mechanical orientation (end cap to right as described in E0900301 assembly document). We decided to rotate the magnet so that now the configurations/rotations at LLO and LHO are the same, even if the mechanical assembly shows now the LHO magnet reversed.
Once the magnet was rotated and we re-centered the beam through, was very easy to position the crystals for the optimum rotation.
Next we hit another snag - we noticed that one of the threaded rods used to lock the crystal holders in place on each side of the magnet would be interfering with the heat sink, since the holes in the magnet housing were too low. We removed the crystals again, and unbuckled the omega-shaped straps and rotated the magnet about its axis to clear the bottom space for the heat sink.
At this moment we re-inspected the crystals under bright light and they still look nice and clean. A couple of tiny spots which didn't blow off, but we assesed they did not need recleaning.
We firmly retighten the cap on the quartz crystal, which surprisingly was slightly loose, probably from twisting/untwisting the holder to insert inside the dust sleeve in the magnet. We also wiped again the inside of the dust shield with IPA.
Finally we inserted the crystals back in the magnet and optimized the positioning:
TGG+QR
| P_inc (mW) | P_p-pol (uW) | dB |
| 106 | 49.4 | 33.32 |
TGG+QR+TGG
| P_inc | P_p calc=P_inc*(sin(22.5))^2 | P_p-pol |
| 106 | 15.52 | 15.52 |
| mW | mW | mW |
Attached is the calibrated spectrum with PSL (red). References are all with the old refcav setup. Apparently PSL doesn't look good, but don't take it too seriously (yet).
When I took the data I've turned off the PSL laser room HEPA, PSL ante room HEPA and PSL room A/Cs off, and turned the make up air down to 30% level with an approval of Michael Rodruck.
Power fluctuation in the cavity is ridiculously large (you can see that the beam spot is moving by the beam radius or more on the ETM), which might be due to high wind today. I'll take another shot tomorrow.
Also it might be that the Prometheus temperature is too low. It's not that I'm seeing that Prometheus is misbehaving, but in the past Bram experienced some problem operating it at too low or too high a temperature. I want to unlock the PSL refcav and raise the crystal temperature a bit but I don't think I'm qualified for PSL room.
BTW we tried turning ISS on and it didn't make any difference.
I left PSL fans and ACs like the following:
PSL laser room HEPA is off.
PSL ante room HEPA is running with 55% level.
ACs are on.
Make up air is running with 75% level.
According to LLO PSL fan manual, when nobody is in the room you can leave laser room HEPA off, ante room HEPA 50% and make up air 75% so this should be OK.
Jim & Hugh Based on our dial indicators, we had a little more aligning to do left over from Friday. We did that and then fine tuned the elevation, again with the dial indicators. Next we opened up the Chamber and shot the position with the Sokkia SetIIX. The East/West position was right there (y=0), of course the machine only reads out to the millimeter. The North/South position was due west of monument LV25 with the west end of the Support Table 2" (<0.1mm south) and the east end 14" or <0.2mm north. So with the position confirmed we checked the level of the Table. It is 0.1mm low and level to +-0.1mm. Tomorrow we'll start building the stack, if we have the forklift. Attached are my notes from this for your perusal.
Went to EY. The power coming out of the fiber was 174 uW.
Originally the Prometheus red crystal temperature was 42.36 degree C. We ended up lowering it down to 31.39 degree C to get a beat note.
The green power dropped by about 20% judging from the QPD sums (e.g. QPDB sum used to be 7500, now it is 6000) and H2:ALS-Y_REFL_B_PWR_INMON (uset to be 12700 unlocked, now it's more like 10200). I changed the offset in REFL_B_PWR accordingly. This means that the old 8000 counts is now 6400 counts.
The waveplate for the fiber output was adjusted to maximize the beat note, which was about -39dbm. Turned on the servo, adjusted the temperature knob several times to relieve the slow temperature servo, and it worked OK.
We measured the OLTF of the PLL even though there's no reason it should change. The UGF was about 23 kHz.
See Jax's entry about the green power going to the chamber and the actual data of the PLL OLTF.
Now the arm locks.
The output of the 532 nm laser at the lower temperature is 32.6 mW. The power going into the arm is 18.6 mW.
The PLL OLTF data from the SR785 is attached.
While I am at LLO, I am running the Phase 2a chamberside testing of MC1. I have read the log and see no reasons why I should not actualte on MC1 chamberside. I am aware that people are on the floor and even possibly working on the same table. I'll look at the DQ as I go. Please email me (or call my cell) if you need to.
Discovered that the IOP watchdog kept tripping since it was not bypassed. Dave will boot h1sus2a front end this morning in order to implement the bypass.
Now that Dave reportedly bypassed the IOP, I am restarting TFs.
M. Barton, J. Kissel, J. Shapiro, S. Stepleskwi Mark has spent a good bit of time, (a) creating a new parameter set of the QUAD model to represent the current, odd-ball main-chain of H2 SUS ITMY configuration (a wire hang of the a glass mass) called 'wirerehang' (originally reported in LHO aLOG 3017), and (b) while creating the awesome new QUAD model mode shape wikipages, discovered a few bugs in the reaction chain model parameter sets ('erm' and 'thincp'), and has fixed them. Here, I document these changes by (1) Comparing the updated model against the previous version (in the case of the reaction chain parameters), and comparing against what we would have used otherwise (in the case of the wire rehang models), (2) Comparing both models to representative measurements we have of each, and (3) Explaining / justifying the details of the parameters that have changed. For (1) and (2), see attached plots for each of the three updated models, and for (3) see the tables below. Note, only parameters that have changed are shown, and of those, only the changes in hard-coded (as opposed to derived/calculated from hard-coded) parameters are shown. As of this entry, the updates to ${SusSVN}/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/MatlabTools/QuadModel_Production/quadopt_wirerehang.m ${SusSVN}/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/MatlabTools/QuadModel_Production/quadopt_thincp.m ${SusSVN}/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/MatlabTools/QuadModel_Production/quadopt_erm.m which are options for the buildType argument of the function ${SusSVN}/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/MatlabTools/QuadModel_Production/generate_Quad_Model_Production.m which produces models all production analysis software suites have been committed to the svn, under rev 3304. Please svn up! Executive summary of changes: ----------------------------- Wire Re-hang Major Changes: - Changed sign of TOP ('n' stage) off-diagonal moments of inertia due to misinterpretation of coordinate system used in Final Design Document (though this has little affect on the predicted dynamics because the magnitude is small) Small Changes: - TOP ('n' stage) and UIM ('1' stage) mass weights ('m' s) and moments of inertia ('I' s) adjusted to reflect QUAD retrofits - Radius, mass and moments of inertia of TST ('3' stage) changed to reflect the (glass mass and prisms) vs. (metal mass and prisms) - Change of d's to better reflect measured pitch frequencies of (glass mass and prisms) vs. (metal mass and prisms) - PUM to TST horizontal separations ('n3', 'n4','n5') changed to match glass mass and prisms vs. metal mass and prisms - Spring stiffness ('k') updated to match Brett's 2010 fit to vertical TFs (vs. a prior, 2008 fit). From the plots: - Most features remain identical, and match up well with either the wire measurements or the one wire-rehang H2 SUS ITMY measurement. - As usual, Pitch, the most sensitive degree of freedom, is now better matched to the data, but have changed no more than 10%. - The changed parameters only affect Pitch dynamics, so the model hasn't changed, and still matches the data exquisitely. Thin CP Major Changes: - Changed sign of TOP ('n' stage) off-diagonal moments of inertia due to misinterpretation of coordinate system used in Final Design Document (though this has little affect on the predicted dynamics because the magnitude is small) Minor Changes: - UIM ('1' stage) mass weights ('m' s) and moments of inertia ('I' s) adjusted to reflect QUAD retrofits (specifically the pitch adjuster). From the plots: - Without lacing cables, the model continues to match the data extremely well. - With lacing cables, in L, T, V, R, and Y, there's still a bit of difference between the model and measurements, though only in stiffness as expected. The resonant frequencies still match just about as good without lacing cables. - Pitch, the DOF most affected by the lacing cables (who's surprised?) is the worst, but still, only the lowest two modes in frequency are increased (i.e. modeP1 and modeP2 which involve the TOP and UIM masses, which have the most lacing cables running through them). - Any and all remaining discrepancies between model and measurement are not of much concern, since this is a reaction chain which has no where near the control-noise performance requirements as the main chain, so we'll most likely rely on a simple set of damping filters that are robust against the differences. ERM Major Changes: - Corrected TST stage thickness, it had the Thin CP value (copy'n'paste oversight). - Changed sign of TOP ('n' stage) and PUM ('2' stage) off-diagonal moments of inertia due to misinterpretation of coordinate system used in Final Design Document (though this has little affect on the predicted dynamics because the magnitude is small) Minor Changes: - Updated TST stage moments of inertia for an ERM, as opposed to a Thin CP. From the plots: - For L,T,V,R, and Y, either model doesn't perfectly capture the changes brought on by lacing cables, or from switching from metal to glass -- specifically the increase in stiffness (from cables), and the bifurcation of the second trans mode -- but, as with the Thin CP, it's expected and not a big deal. - For Pitch, neither model gets the stiffness right, cables or no cables, though we should triple check this against other no-lacing cable, ERM chain measurements. Unclear why this is. Naturally, when you add lacing cables, the lowest resonant modes increase in frequency, but this is exactly the same as on a Thin CP, so it's understandable since they have the same cables, the same configuration of routing, and the mode shapes are the same (see modeP1 and modeP2 of the last version of the production models). - Any and all remaining discrepancies between model and measurement are not of much concern, since this is a reaction chain which has no where near the control-noise performance requirements as the main chain, so we'll most likely rely on a simple set of damping filters that are robust against the differences. Full details of parameter changes --------------------------------- Table 1: Wire Rehang 'Param' 'Former Production Value' 'Updated Value' 'Differnce' 'Difference' '' 'Model: wire' 'Model: wirerehang' '(Absolute)' '(Percent)' 'mn' '21.9' '22' '0.0696' '0.317%' 'Inyz' '4.65e-05' '-4.65e-05' '-9.3093e-05' '-200%' 'Inzx' '0.00172' '-0.00172' '-0.0034368' '-200%' 'm1' '22.3' '21.5' '-0.81226' '-3.64%' 'I1x' '0.509' '0.505' '-0.0040466' '-0.795%' 'I1y' '0.0711' '0.0724' '0.0013481' '1.9%' 'I1z' '0.518' '0.518' '0.00013532' '0.0261%' 'I1xy' '-0.0132' '-0.0132' '5.271e-06' '-0.0399%' 'I1yz' '0' '1.37e-05' '1.3742e-05' 'Inf%' 'I1zx' '0' '-8.08e-06' '-8.084e-06' '-Inf%' 'm3' '39.6' '39.6' '0.031' '0.0783%' 'I3x' '0.598' '0.568' '-0.029963' '-5.01%' 'I3y' '0.418' '0.42' '0.0011272' '0.269%' 'I3z' '0.4' '0.411' '0.010141' '2.53%' 'dm' '-0.00351' '-0.00353' '-2.2308e-05' '0.636%' 'dn' '0.00328' '0.00423' '0.00095167' '29%' 'd0' '-0.00174' '-0.00175' '-1.0004e-05' '0.575%' 'd1' '0.00299' '0.00399' '0.00099789' '33.3%' 'd2' '0.00709' '0.00708' '-4.0147e-06' '-0.0566%' 'd3' '0.001' '-0.00116' '-0.0021609' '-216%' 'd4' '0.001' '-0.00116' '-0.0021609' '-216%' 'n3' '0.176' '0.172' '-0.00425' '-2.41%' 'n4' '0.171' '0.172' '0.00075' '0.438%' 'n5' '0.171' '0.177' '0.00555' '3.24%' 'ln' '0.445' '0.449' '0.004192' '0.942%' 'l1' '0.311' '0.309' '-0.002415' '-0.777%' 'l2' '0.339' '0.331' '-0.008213' '-2.42%' 'l3' '0.604' '0.604' '0.00029403' '0.0487%' 'r1' '0.000355' '0.000356' '5e-07' '0.141%' 'kcn' '1.41e+03' '1.43e+03' '17.9919' '1.27%' 'kc1' '1.65e+03' '1.65e+03' '-1.8307' '-0.111%' 'kc2' '2.42e+03' '2.38e+03' '-40.5505' '-1.67%' 'kw3' '1.15e+05' '1.15e+05' '-56.022' '-0.0487%' Table 2: Thin CP 'Param' 'Former Production Value' 'Updated Value' 'Differnce' 'Difference' '' 'Model: thincp' 'Model: thincp_20120831' '(Absolute)' '(Percent)' 'I1y' '0.073' '0.0734' '0.00040601' '0.556%' 'I1z' '0.519' '0.518' '-0.00077135' '-0.149%' 'den3' '3.98e+03' '2.2e+03' '-1780' '-44.7%' 'Inyz' '4.36e-05' '-4.36e-05' '-8.7197e-05' '-200%' 'Inzx' '-0.00171' '0.00171' '0.0034279' '-200%' Table 3: ERM 'Param' 'Former Production Value' 'Updated Value' 'Differnce' 'Difference' '' 'Model: erm' 'Model: erm_20120831' '(Absolute)' '(Percent)' 'I1y' '0.073' '0.0734' '0.00040601' '0.556%' 'I1z' '0.519' '0.518' '-0.00077135' '-0.149%' 'tx' '0.1' '0.13' '0.02996' '29.9%' 'tr' '0.17' '0.17' '-1.5e-05' '-0.00882%' 'den3' '3.98e+03' '2.2e+03' '-1780' '-44.7%' 'I3x' '0.376' '0.376' '-6.6301e-05' '-0.0176%' 'I3y' '0.21' '0.225' '0.014932' '7.12%' 'I3z' '0.21' '0.225' '0.014932' '7.12%' 'Inyz' '4.36e-05' '-4.36e-05' '-8.7197e-05' '-200%' 'Inzx' '-0.00171' '0.00171' '0.0034279' '-200%' 'I2yz' '-2.38e-05' '2.38e-05' '4.751e-05' '-200%' 'I2zx' '-4.41e-05' '4.41e-05' '8.8146e-05' '-200%'
A couple of notes: * The CP and ERM models correspond to cases mark.barton/20120831TMproductionCP and mark.barton/20120831TMproductionERM of the Mathematica model. * Wiki pages for the CP and ERM models were generated on 9/11/12 and linked to from https://awiki.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLIGO/Suspensions/Background/QUAD/Models . * Also on 9/11/12, the resonance wiki page at https://lhocds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/wiki/Resonances was updated with the new (but almost identical) mode frequencies. * The wire rehang model r3304 is based on Mathematica case mark.barton/20120601TMproductionTMrehang but has had one additional edit by Jeff K to supply a parameter pend.bd not used in the Mathematica. A new case to be called mark.barton/20120831TMproductionTMrehang that has the same MOI fixes as the CP and ERM updates is in the works.
