I had set the ITMY R0 Tfs to be retaken because there wasn't enough time the previous night and the measurement ran into the morning. So people were already on top of it, tripping watchdogs left and right. I needed to leave it with a delay to run after Vincent's ISI measurements, so I wasn't here to see it crash right after the first few lines. Sad. WIll redo at next opportunity.
(Corey, Hugo, Jim)
Reinstalled H3 GS13
Previous one had issues and was removed. This current one (S/N 66 of the pod), was a spare we happened to have available (it, like all of our GS-13's must not go into a vacuum system, since they are not acceptable for in-vacuum use). After this one was installed, the door was re-attached. On the GS13, I did not install the bracket which bolts to the base flange and "clamps" the cable in place (couldn't find its screw).
Rough Balancing Of The System
With the system locked, I noted Dial Indicator(DI) values:
Corner A
H: +0.001
V: +0.001
Corner B
H: removed
V: 0.000
Corner C
H: +0.001
V: +0.001
Corner D
H: -0.001
V: 0.000
Since we looked good in this locked state and were getting ready to balance, I zeroed all the Dial Indicators, and installed the Corner B Horiz Dial Indicator. The system was then unlocked, and then I rebalanced the system to within 0.001" on all DIs.
Wired Up And Set Gaps for CPS
The Capacitive Position Sensors (CPSs) were then cabled up, and powered on. The gaps were then set for all the CPS (generally able to get close to 0.000V, with our requirement to have them below 0.200V).
Dressing Cabling
The cabling for Sensors/Actuators were plugged in and dressed for performance.
Stage0 Level
With the optical level, Stage0 level was checked, and ultimately deemed acceptable.
Fine Balancing Of System
With running and gapped CPSs, the DIs were backed off, and the CPSs were used to finely balance the system. Before a fine balance, the CPS Access Doors were installed. The system was then balanced such that Vertical CPSs had values under 0.200V.
Document Checklist
While we were working on general items for the ISI, Hugo worked on checks for his Assembly document (measuring Actuator gaps, etc.). He continued this work after we left him with a finely balanced ISI.
A. Effler, J. Garcia Measurements of driven transfer functions for the H2 ITMY M0 and R0 top masses were taken overnight for the suspension in the BSC8 chamber. The ISI was locked for this measurement and both M0 & R0 masses were left undamped. The attached plots are of the M0 top mass transfer functions. The R0 watchdog tripped during the final two DoFs and will be retaken tonight.
This data looks great! I'd like to have more monolithic QUAD data against which to compare before officially accepting the dynamics of this suspension (read -- H2 SUS ETMY, which is coming soon!). Two points on model vs. measurement discrepancies: - The first pitch mode is lower (in frequency) than the model. I'll explore what this means regarding the parameters of the suspension (although we all know it's going to some break off that's ~1mm off from the model), but the real point of concern is control-ability. If the that pitch mode gets too close to the first longitudinal mode, then cross-coupling between L and P degrees of freedom makes control more difficult in that you cannot treat the DOFs as independent SISO loops. BUT for L and P, we'll have to do this anyways. - The DC magnitude of *all* degrees of freedom appears for be underestimated by a bit. This is indicative of imprecise calibration, not of anything physically flawed in the dynamics of the suspension. The calibration factor (60 [cts/m / cts/N]) was picked as a nice round number that scaled prior data to the model well. However, that prior data was taken on suspensions where the relative OSEM sensitivities we not well compensated -- at least not to the level of precision consistent with the level of discrepancy between model and measurement here. Nothing to worry about, and now that we have relative OSEM sensitivities better compensated, we should reassess this calibration factor (i.e scale it to the model with better precision).
Last night we took FMY and ITMY TFs, but we didn't get to finish the reaction chain measurement because morning came. I am repeating that tonight, after Vincent is done with the BSC ISI. Attached are the FMY transfer functions, compared with the new model tweaked by JeffK. All looks great except pitch is a bit off. I will check how it looks compared to the other measurements tomorrow. JeffG will post the results for ITMY main chain, and we'll do the same for R0 once we get the data.
I agree, the results look fantastic. My guess is that the only discrepancy between model and measurement seen (Pitch2Pitch TF, pg 5 of attachment) is due to a variation in M1 blade-spring tip heights (and therefore suspension breakoff point d1). As we've mentioned many times before, these heights are set by-eye to the roughly +/- 1mm precision, and the magnitude of that particular transfer function is sensitive to such levels of precision. Given this data we should consider the H2 SUS FMY mechanical dynamics accepted, and should be used as the reference data for this suspension for all future measurements. However, we're still fighting confusion over loop signs, so we can't yet accept the control system. Note -- this doesn't mean we're done with taking this particular measurement for all time -- it should be performed any time the mechanical system (specifically the suspended components, and/or its sensors and or actuators) is changed. This includes after an earthquake stop lock/unlock cycle.
We consolodated those system which will remain in the MSR into the far rack (which is the only rack which will remain in the MSR). This required powering down the timing systems, which stopped the H2 front ends, the H2 DAQ and the test stands in the staging building. We also rerouted the GC networking.
The timing master was upgraded at the same time. The DC power to the IO Chassis at EY was reconfigured such that one 24V supply feeds SUS and SEI, and the second 24V supply feeds PEM and TCS.
h2dc0 was power cycled, as well as all front ends and their IO Chassis as part of the recovery. All frontends were burt restored to 11:00am, except susitmy which was restored to its safe.snap file.
Yesterday the LDAS fiber optics panel, the Q logic switch and the tape robot cables were moved from the MSR to the computer users room.
The ISI is uncovered and unlocked. The HEPI is also unlocked.
As I noted in log 1989, we completed the attachment of the HEPI Actuators to the Suspended Structure Friday and made some corrections with the DSCW Springs to bring the dial indicators back to Aligned position. We've managed to do this, mostly. My current assessment of where I've moved the Cartridge is 3mils up, 10mils West, 12mils South, and 170urad CC from above. According to IAS final numbers, this change, if my estimate is accurate, should not move the ITMY out of tolerable position. We currently should be about: 120urad cc from ideal & 0.65mm South 0.7mm West 0.5mm High Of course after the ACB goes in all these numbers will be revisited by IAS and we'll be happy to further dial it in. The connection of the Actuator to the Suspension does complicate the moving and we may need to again disconnect the actuators from the Suspension if the move is excessive. Alright, only 21 HEPI systems to go! EricA & Hugh
We made tweaks to the Actuator Mounting and the Bellows shield to give us maximum available range. There is one actuator-Vertical Pier1(NE) the range of which is just 0.045" in one direction. All others are 50mils or above. EricA & Hugh
Table legs were grouted into place today, with help from Robert and Anamaria. Fans are running on top of the legs and drying out the hydrostone.
Additionally, table cleaning is making good progress. Christina and Terisha are in the final stages, blowing dust out of the tapped holes and vacuuming it up.
Rai may want to open GV18 during his visit this week.
The H2 mirror was cleaned this morning in the OSB optics lab. The pictures show just a few of the steps involved. The mirror is heading to the LSB optics lab to bake in the optics air-bake oven until Friday. - Cheryl, Greg, Thomas, Joe
The mirror is now in the air bake oven.
Repaired dust monitors were put in the LVEA in the "Beer Garden" (H0:PEM-LVEA_DST5) and near the previous location of the H2 electronics racks (H0:PEM-LVEA_DST7). One was also put in the OSB bake oven room (H0:PEM-LAB_DST3).
The latest SUS QUAD build in the Staging Building is designated "QUAD 03 BUILD 03" in the SVN directory. All data should be saved in the "/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/X1/QUAD03/BUILD03/" directory.
J^3 (Bartlett, Garcia, Kissel), A. Ramirez Jeff and I grabbed the first set of transfer functions from X1 SUS QUAD03 after Jeff and Andres have brought it up-to-date with retrofits. Note, that this is the "first brush" suite -- These are taken before reaction chain cables are installed, to ensure the dynamics are expected. The results are attached. I've compared these measurements against the three other ETM-flavor QUADs we've build across the project, X2SUSQUAD13 @ LLO X2SUSQUAD14 @ LLO X1SUSQUAD04 @ LHO (soon to be H2SUSETMY) Not that in this latest round of measurements, the OSEM Open Light Current has not been normalized, so the ~25% discrepancy in overall DC amplitude of the transfer functions (for example R0 V and R) should be attributed mostly to uncompensated variation in sensitivity of the OSEM sensors. The results look great; I approve the suspension to go onto installing reaction chain cables. I've left the suspension with damping loops on and running. If I were to be picky, the only thing that I've found that raises a yellow flag, which we should keep an eye on in future measurements: Reaction Chain Lowest Pitch mode is high, but no other pitch dynamics appear to be effected. As a side note, now that we've got more statistics on ETM-style QUADs -- it looks like there's a good deal of excess cross-coupling in the measurements of X1SUSQUAD13, and the other SUS's show that we can build these with much less. We should keep an eye on this when we move to retro-fit/upgrade/add cables. Data Taken from DTT files here: /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/X1/QUAD03/BUILD03/ SAGM0/Data/2012-01-06_X1SUSQUAD03_BUILD03_M0-*-WhiteNoise_TF.xml SAGR0/Data/2012-01-06_X1SUSQUAD03_BUILD03_R0-*-WhiteNoise_TF.xml and exported to .txt in F1F2F3LFRTSD LTVRPY order to .txt files of similar name as above (with "_tf" tag). Data initially processed by: /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/MatlabTools/plotquad_dtttfs.m Data compared with others with: /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/MatlabTools/plotallquad_dtttfs.m
Before closing the doors on the HAM-ISI in the staging building (assembly 1), we measured ASDs of the instruments. The horizontal GS13 in corner 3 (POD SN68 – GS13 SN805) had a bad response at low frequency (see spectra) which is a typical characteristic of a stuck proof mass.
After opening the vacuum pod, we verified that:
- The kinetic feet could not move and the cross bar was not loose.
- We could feel the mass moving when the geophone was tilted
- The mass is centered when the geophone is horizontal (Level on the second circle)
We measured a spectrum while making sure the geophone was horizontal and the proof mass was centered. The spectrum still looks bad.
After taking apart the geophone, we could feel that the mass is not moving freely (sticky). We will replace this geophone with a new one.
(Corey, Eric, Jim, Mitch, Vincent)
The first part of the day was devoted to getting some "before" measurements on the BSC8ISI; that is, before the Vibration Aborbers were installed. Unfortunately, it sounded like clean measurements couldn't be made for both Stages (Sensors were saturating on the system [most likely due to nearby loud hammering/drilling]). Because of this, we were only able to do work on Stage1.
The Stage1 Vibration Absorbers are to be installed on the Outer Walls/Doors of the Trillium & Horiz L4C area. It was quickly discovered that we could not install the Vibration Absorbers. This is because there are a pair of dowel pins (for masses) which are exactly within the bolt pattern for the Vibration Absorber (!).
So, we decided we'd hammer out the pairs of 1/2" dowel pins on the three doors (that's a total of 6 which needed to be pressed out). And we obviously didn't have the equipment to do this, so we MacGyvered tools with what we had (a big mass for a hammer and an allen wrench as a punch). To hammer these pins out, we had to completely remove all three doors which entails removal of lots of bolts, removal of mass from doors, powering down the equipment at the SEI rack, disconnecting cables from the Trillium and L4C, and then carefully taking out these doors to a work table for pin removal.
The doors were eventually re-installed (not torqued), the ISI was covered, and left in that state overnight.
This morning the crew is already set for starting the work we intended to start last night.
We're running transfer functions over night of both ITMY and FMY top stages, hopefully it doesn't crash. cdsimac0 cannot put in excitations through Matlab I did not have the patience to investigate, so I logged into cdsws5 and am running them there "remotely". The 3 line script calling the three items to run (ITMY M0, R0 and FMY M1) is in SusSVN/sus/trunk/Common/MaltabTools/SchroederPhaseTools/. That will give you the info on which scripts are used, all committed to svn. For future reference, the BSC-ISI is locked and possibly in a funky position.