D. Cook, J. Oberling, T. Sadecki

• ETMy Pitch: ~662 µrad down
  • Desired pitch of 639 µrad down with a ±100 µrad spec
• ETMy Yaw: ~64 µrad CW
  • Desired yaw of 0 µrad with a ±100 µrad spec

For the ERM we aligned the pitch until the reflection from the ERM was overlapping the reflection from the AR surface of the ETMy.  With this combination together I am unable to get an accurate measurement of the pitch and yaw because the two reflections sway independently, creating an irregularly shaped "blob" on the laser autocollimator (LAC) which is not representative of the pitch and yaw of either surface.  The ERM spec is ±1.47 mrad of differential pitch and yaw between the AR surface of the ETMy and the front surface of the ERM.  With the two reflections overlapping we are well within this spec.  The ETMy and ERM are now aligned and we (IAS) are waiting word from TMS to begin aligning the TMS assembly.

The Qube-to-Cartridge Installation was successfull and went pretty much as planned. We were nearly able to get the qube into position using the genie/5-axis table combination, but were a little shy of the back (+Y) leg of the cookie cutter (we used the far cookie cutter option relative to the Quad). Weighing options, we decided to apply the pusher tools to finally adjust the position to the cookie cutter. We then installed all (except one) dog clamps as per D0900419. The small dog clamp which partially wedges between the ISI Table and stage 0 will be attempted tomorrow as we need a short socket and overall 'low-profile' tool set-up for it. We just lacked the short socket.

Now we hope that our position and bearing are just right relative to the ETM. By eye it looks good.
 

Attached are plots of dust counts > .5 microns.

For today's TMS activity under the cartridge test stand, I clamped the PenRe (the mass most vulnerable to bumping, yet also the most robust), plut the face shields on the ERM and ETMy, then bagged the suspension.  The main chain is theoretically* hanging free (* the clamping of the PenRe could have pushed a reaction mass into a main mass).  This is how the suspension will remain until further notice, due to TMS installation.

At the request of Jeff Kissel, the H2SUSFMY.ini file was replaced with an older one, archive/H2SUSFMY_120211_095125.ini.  A DAQ Reload was performed and the dc0 restarted.  The H2SUSFMY.ini file had been generated with two channels active during the RCG 2.1.4 update.

After the timing failure, and subsequent reboot of all H2 frontends, I had to go in and BURT restore all the suspensions. I started off using the previous versions of the _safe.snap files found in
${userapps}/sus/h2/burtfiles/
but as previously reported, they show a red "not ok!" when restored, presumably because they were generated when the DAQ system was at RCG 2.3.1. But again, it seems to restore the EPICs values just fine.

I glanced over H2 SUS ITMY, H2 SUS ETMY, and H2 SUS FMY, made sure all there damping loops were functional, with their BIOS and watchdogs set appropriately (for their given model status -- ITMY is at a newer version of this stuff) and have re-created the follow snapshots, which should be used (for now, until we upgrade ETMY and FMY, and merge the branch-2.4 and trunk of the userapps repo)

H2 SUS ITMY (Now at RCG 2.4) -- /opt/rtcds/userapps/branch-2.4/sus/h2/burtfiles/h2susitmy_safe.snap
H2 SUS FMY -- /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/sus/h2/burtfiles/fmy/h2susfmy_safe.snap
H2 SUS ETMY -- /opt/rtcds/userapps/release/sus/h2/burtfiles/etmy/h2susetmy_safe.snap


I've left all suspensions in this safe state.

After the timing failure that Jim alludes to below (I don't know the details of the failure, hopefully those on site have an aLOG pending), all H2 aLIGO front ends were rebooted.

Due to a timing system interruption at the master fanout, the suspension and seismic test stands needed to be restarted.  Models were restarted, but no BURT restore was performed. 

After the relief of the UIM blade clamp screws, I've taken a new set of data. The results look MUCH better, but I believe there's still some but of interference some where, as all degrees of freedom (on both chains) the data is dreadfully noisy, with almost no coherence below 1Hz. I don't believe this remaining running is a show stopper, but we should be on the look out.

Three like data sets:
For M0
H2 SUS ITMY M0 (2012-01-10) -- Post-cartridge installed Phase 3b approved monolithic fiber chain (should be the same between an ITM and an ETM)
H2 SUS ETMY M0 (2012-02-13) -- Yesterday's data, with UIM blade spring bolts rubbing against the top mass, between chains.
H2 SUS ETMY M0 (2012-02-14) -- Today's data, with the UIM rubbing relieved.

For R0 
H2 SUS ETMY R0 (2011-11-22) --  Phase 1b approved metal erm chain (should be the same  roughly the same between glass and metal)
H2 SUS ETMY R0 (2012-02-13) -- Yesterday's data, with UIM blade spring bolts rubbing against the top mass, between chains.
H2 SUS ETMY R0 (2012-02-14) -- Today's data, with the UIM rubbing relieved.

Stainless steel helicoils that were incorrectly used for ISC cables were all replaced by Nitronic 60 helicoils.

Cleared the path to the VEA.

Thought that we'd move the cube and the clean room to the area between the roll up doors, but realized that we won't have a place to bunny up tomorrow.

Attached are plots of dust counts > .5 microns.

Kyle, iGerardo 

Removed 6" roughing port gate valve and associated plumbing from YBM pump port -> Installed 8" CF Class A blank (borrowed from H2 input mode cleaner pump port) on YBM roughing pump port -> Installed new (but unbaked) 8" CF blank at location of borrowed Class A blank -> Labeled unbaked flange so as to be replaced before exposing to vacuum.

Since it's clearly frustrating that we can't move forward with the H2 SUS TMSY installation, I wanted to show what's going on with the TOP to TOP transfer functions of H2 SUS ETMY, (Main Chain [M0] data I took this morning) so people understand why I'm holding up the show.

I don't have an answer yet, but these are the plots at which I'm staring to try and glean what's going on -- suggestions are welcome!~

I'm still taking data on the reaction chain -- will post when I have that data.

The first attachment (allquads_120213*.pdf) is MAGENTA, is current (2012-02-13), "first light" monolithic ETMY data, compared against
- BLUE A model of the monolithic main chain (fiber).
- ORANGE H2 SUS ITMY's "first light" data (2011-11-19) -- Mated w/ BSC-ISI, First Monolithic Results (Fully Laced), M0 F1 poorly aligned/ratty. M0 R and M0 V not measured because of bad M0 RT.
- BLACK H2 SUS ITMY's latest and greatest (2012-01-10), phase 3a approved, in-air, post-cartridge install data.

The second attachment shows only the current data, but in more detail (and with regrettably more busy plots), specifically cross coupling and OSEM basis response to the EULER drive.

Rolf, Alex, Dave.

We upgraded LHO from RCG-2.3.1 to RCG-2.4.1 today. All systems were burtrestored using the supplied safe.snap files, or from the autoburt of 9am this morning. H2 systems were not activated beyond doing the burt restores (watchdogs left tripped, etc.).

The problem of some cores running long was investigated. All front ends were configured to new advanced bios settings. This appears to have fixed the run-long problem, we will continue to check this over the weekend.