- Calum's crew at EX testing Installation Fixture Arm
- SEI welding at BSC4
- SEI working on two ISIs at End Stations
- SEI getting HAMs ready for testing
- Apollo testing H2 IMC tube
- Richard and Ken: heat trace, cable trays in LVEA
- Sprague on site
- Praxair services CP1, expect alarms for 24 hours
- Oscar finished baling tumbleweeds at 1137
- Platt Electric Supply arrives for Richard in the afternoon
- King Soft Water services RO
- OSB doors locked at 4:17pm.

Weather: Warm at ~65°F/~17.7°C! Occasional 30mph wind gusts at CS.

2985 - TerryS - Clean chamber and rest of building
2984 - Bubba - Remove 2 acoustic enclosures from LVEA
2983 - Hugh - Install HEPI actuators into SEI housings
2981 - Bubba - Install H2 IMC tubes
2978 - Cheryl - Align H1 TCS
2976 - Jodi - ICC HAM11/12
2973 - RichardM - Cable trays by BSC6/8
2949 - PeterK - H2 PSL installation
2945 - DougD - HLTS weldment inspection with Romer Arm
2940 - Bubba - Assemble work platform/e-module at BSC8
2860 - Bubba - Relocate BSC5 from MX to EX
2796 - Squeezers - Daily laser safe/hazard transitions

Jason was able to get a reading of the CP font surface and found it to be hanging at ~400 uRAD (  nice eyechrometry adjustment, Travis).  After a recalibration ofthe IAS table monument post,Jason then determined that themain chain was hanging only0.5mm off of the height nominal (recall 1. 6mm was measured a few weeks ago but is nowthought to have been with a mis-calibrated rod. The reactionchain is still hanging ~3 mm too low as observed by eye.  Likely, this is due mainly due to the addition of the lacing cable mass, and possibly some discrepancy between the metal CP dummy mass weight and the actual glass CP weight.  After stewing on the idea of having to add more shims to the top stage blade tips (drop hazard above the monolithic) and the realignment of the top BOSEMs which would result, Brett suggested a much easier fix.  So we are considering removing the weight from the PenRe and then readjusting pitch at that stage due to the assymetric mass drop (mass will be removed from the AR surface of the mass only, so the balast mass will need to be adjusted to counter this).

Last week, we connected the BSC6 geophones to the electronic rack. Powerspectra confirmed that geophones were not damaged during the transport of BSC6 from the staging building to the end-station. Geophones calibrated spectra (ISI locked and without payload) can be found at

https://svn.ligo.caltech.edu/svn/seismic/BSC-ISI/H2/ETMY/Data/Misc/
 

Dave and Jim,

as part of the investigation to h2fw0 crashing, we installed 48GB of RAM into h2fw0 this morning. Now h2dc0, h2fw0 and h2fw1 all have the same memory configuration of 48GB RAM taken from the Sun X4270 machines. On restart we verified that h2fw0 no longer uses any swap memory. Should know by tomorrow if this has fixed the "retransmission error" restarts.

I started Jamie's h2iscey model this morning. This completes the full set of front end systems for the H2 Y arm test system.

Attached is the completed CDS overview medm screen

Richard fixed the stuck M0 Right BOSEM channel at the rack first thing this morning.  I just recentered it to 50% OL.  Mark B. and Brett are going to look at TFs again.

M. Barton, J. Kissel, B. Shapiro

After losing M0 RT, and failing to decouple F1 from Yaw, we went for the next best thing to tell us what's wrong with the suspension -- transfer functions. I attach a semi-complete set of transfer functions for the main chain (M0), and a complete set of Reaction Chain (R0) transfer functions. 

Main Chain (2011-11-19_H2SUSITMY_M0_ALL_TFs.pdf):
Because we've lost M0 RT, we were not able to get either Vertical or Roll transfer functions. However, of the four degrees of freedom that we could measure L, T, P, and Y -- L, T, and Y compare well with the model. P looks like a total disaster, but is surprising given the poor results from diagonalization. However, because L, T, and Y compare well, the poor pitch results may just be a result of F1 being totally misaligned, and not a fundamental problem with the dynamics of the suspension.
Some notes on the analysis:

    - I've switched to using a monolithic model as the reference, whose parameters can be found here:
      ${SusSVN}/sus/trunk/QUAD/Common/MatlabTools/QuadModel_Production/quadopt20060509productionmainasbuiltoffdiag_fiber.m
    - I've used a special version of plotquad_dtttfs.m to generate these sets of plots, because it took a good deal of finagling to get the script to work with less than all six degrees from freedom. It can be found here:
      ${SusSVN}/sus/trunk/QUAD/H2/ITMY/SAGM0/Scripts/plotquad_dtttfs_111119_0251_NoVR.m
      Probably not a good idea to try and use it in the future, it was quick last minute hack up.
    - Because the monolithic and metal configurations' dynamics are so different, I've elected to not compare this measured transfer function against the other measurements we have of main chains (since they've all been metal dummy masses up to this point).


Reaction Chain: (allquads_111120_H2SUSITMY_R0_ALL_ZOOMED_TFs.pdf)
Here, this is also the first time we're looking at a glass reaction mass, but I don't expect the dynamics to change that much between metal and glass. However, expectations may not be well grounded, because the degrees of freedom where were expect very little change (because they are relatively insensitive to physical parameters, or are defined by tightly control mechanical dimensions), V and Y, show changes. The attached plot shows this same suspension as its reaction chain evolved:
ORANGE (H2SUSITMY, "Metal, Before Lacing").

     2011-08-10 measurement of H2 SUS ITMY
     - Metal dummy masses in place. 
     - In the LVEA, on the mechanical test stand 2, suspended from a solid stack.
     - Protected from air currents with a C3 parachute. 
     - No lacing cables in this measurement.
     - No cage stiffening elements are in place

BLACK (H2SUSITMY, "Metal, After Lacing 1"). 

     2011-08-15 / 2011-08-12 measurement of H2 SUS ITMY,
     - Metal dummy masses in place. 
     - In the LVEA on the mechanical test stand 2, suspended from a solid stack.
     - Protected from air currents with a C3 parachute. 
     - All lacing cables installed but for the ESD cabling (i.e. UIM, and PUM cables).
     - No cage stiffening elements are in place

MAGENTA (H2SUSITMY, "Metal, After Mating"). 

     2011-08-25 measurement of H2 SUS ITMY, 
     - Metal dummy masses in place. 
     - In the LVEA on the mechanical test stand 1, suspended from a locked BSC-ISI.
     - Without the protection of a C3 'chute.
     - It has all lacing cables installed but for the ESD cabling (i.e. UIM, and PUM cables).
     - All stiffening elements are in place, including stiffening sleeve, lower structure side panels, and upper structure cross-braces.

CYAN (H2SUSITMY, "Glass, Fully Laced"). 

     2011-11-19 measurement of H2 SUS ITMY, 
     - Glass TCP masses in place. 
     - In the LVEA on the mechanical test stand 1, suspended from a locked BSC-ISI.
     - Without the protection of a C3 'chute.
     - It has all lacing cables installed, including connection to TCOP 
     - No cage stiffening elements are in place


We see that L, T, and R remain constant. Awesome.
Both the Highest (visible) V Mode (pg 3) has increased from the expected 3.6 Hz to 3.9 Hz, and the Second Yaw Mode has increased from 1.3 Hz to 1.358 Hz. I'll need more information from the modeling experts before I can make a claim as to what causes such change (mostly because I've never had to think about these DOFs before!). 
As usual, pitch remains as the most dynamic (haha, get it?) degree of freedom. It appears as though with this configuration of lacing cables, the second pitch mode remains at 1.8 Hz between Metal and Glass TCP, but the lowest mode is now clearly resolved and split between 0.71 Hz and 0.81 Hz. Further, it appears as though we have found a configuration that effect the highest modes, specifically noting the frequency and shape of the response at 3.4 Hz and 3.9 Hz.

So, in summary -- we've got lots of [thinking / investigating / discussing / adjustments] to do on this suspension before we can move on. 

Welcome to the land of glass, H2SUSITMY! 

J. Kissel, T. Sadecki

After installing further fiber guard protection, and freeing up both chains the H2 SUS ITMY, Travis and I attempted to diagonalize the M0 and R0 BOSEMs. Though we were successful at achieving at as good as we normally get on R0, were became stumped by M0. First, the measurement of the vertical diagonalization was limited by the loss of M0 RT (see 1770), but at least the coil side still worked. F1 gave up the most trouble -- in yaw, regardless of where we moved the BOSEM sensor/coil with respect to the flag, we could not find a spot that had better than a few dB isolation from F2 and F3. We can normally get ~15 dB, if not better. After about a half hour's worth of trying, we called it quits, so I could go in for a round of transfer functions in hopes that it might reveal more.

Note -- though the suspension is free, it's alignment has only been roughed in. Pitch has been confirmed to be well aligned by Jason / IAS tooling, but other degrees of freedom remain only bubble leveled at best.

J. Kissel, T. Sadecki

Yesterday, while reinstalling and aligning the H2 SUS ITMY M0 and R0 BOSEMs, we discovered that the M0 Right OSEM sensor is railing. Here're the facts:

- This is BOSEM S/N 499, according to LHO aLOG 972.
- The signal coming into the ADC is railed, at *exactly* 2^16 (as opposed to if the OSEM were just reading its open light current).
- The previously measured open light current for this OSEM is 26205.8 cts, or 66 uA.
- Disconnecting the cable from the BOSEM at the micro-D, in vacuum connection does not effect the signal, i.e. railing regardless of OSEM or no OSEM.
- There are no fault lights present on the satellite amplifier boxes.
- The satellite amplifier has been modified, as per G1100856
- Driving in vertical shows that the actuator side of the OSEM is still functional.
- The last time we've looked at signals from this OSEM was just before the fiber break, in mid October.


This should be fixed ASAP. 

B. Bland, J.^3 (Bartlett, Garcia, and Kissel)

We have cabled the reaction chain of X1 SUS QUAD04 (Which is destined to become H2 SUS ETMY), and measured response. Executive summary: Main Chain looks beautiful, as it did before the lacing. On the reaction chain, Pitch shows a significant increase in stiffness. We should try to adjust the lacing such that we at least get the frequencies equivalent to the after-lacing H2 SUS ITMY measurement.

The whole story:
Attached is a comparison between five measurements of two QUADs: H2 SUS ITMY and X1 SUS QUAD 04, before and after lacing. I chose these measurements because they are most similar in there before vs. after assembly states. Regrettably, the reaction chain between the two are comparing an ITM (thin) and ETM (thick), but by now, we're comfortable with the differences in dynamics between these two species of QUAD. 

The description of each measurement is as follows:
ORANGE (H2SUSITMY, "Before Lacing").

     2011-08-10 measurement of H2 SUS ITMY
     - Metal dummy masses in place. 
     - In the LVEA, on the mechanical test stand 2, suspended from a solid stack.
     - Protected from air currents with a C3 parachute. 
     - No lacing cables in this measurement.
     - No cage stiffening elements are in place

BLACK (H2SUSITMY, "After Lacing 1"). 

     2011-08-15 / 2011-08-12 measurement of H2 SUS ITMY,
     - Metal dummy masses in place. 
     - In the LVEA on the mechanical test stand 2, suspended from a solid stack.
     - Protected from air currents with a C3 parachute. 
     - All lacing cables installed but for the ESD cabling (i.e. UIM, and PUM cables).
     - No cage stiffening elements are in place

MAGENTA (H2SUSITMY, "After Lacing 2"). 

     2011-08-25 measurement of H2 SUS ITMY, 
     - Metal dummy masses in place. 
     - In the LVEA on the mechanical test stand 1, suspended from a locked BSC-ISI.
     - Without the protection of a C3 'chute.
     - It has all lacing cables installed but for the ESD cabling (i.e. UIM, and PUM cables).
     - All stiffening elements are in place, including stiffening sleeve, lower structure side panels, and upper structure cross-braces.

CYAN (X1SUSQUAD04, "Before Lacing"). 

     2011-11-15 measurement of X1 SUS QUAD 04, 
     - Metal dummy masses in place. 
     - In the assembly area of the staging building, suspended from a solid stack.
     - Protected from air currents with a C3 parachute. 
     - It has no lacing cables in this measurement.
     - No cage stiffening elements are in place.

GREEN (X1SUSQUAD04, "After Lacing"). 

     2011-11-19 measurement of X1 SUS QUAD04, 
     - Metal dummy masses in place. 
     - In the assembly area of the staging building, suspended from a solid stack.
     - Protected from air currents with a C3 parachute. 
     - It has all lacing cables installed (i.e. UIM, PUM, and ESD cables).
     - No cage stiffening elements are in place.


Happily, the first six pages of the attached show that the main chains of these suspensions are identical and consistent between all five measurements (except for the DC scaling of Pitch in H2 SUS ITMY, M0 2011-08-15 -- see LHO aLOG 1346 for discussion). 

Further, the reaction chains are reasonably consistent between measurements, in L, T, V, R, and Y. However, we see the reaction chain's Pitch are significantly effected by cabling. This is not terribly surprising a this degree of freedom is most sensitive to stiffness and effective d's, for cabling can change. Though we expect the stiffness to increase, the goal is to have this stiffness increase in a consistent manner, such that the resulting transfer functions are similar enough that one can develop a single control filter. 

We can see that betsy's first attempt at lacing up the reaction chain (i.e. the BLACK, 2011-08-12 measurment) was best, and although the X1SUSQUAD04's lacing is not the worst, it's still significant difference from the best. The obvious physical difference between the best 2011-08-12 H2SUSITMY, and 2011-11-19 X1SUSQUAD04, and  are the ESD cables -- BLACK does not have them, where GREEN does. But because 2011-08-25 H2SUSITMY does not have lacing cables, and is the worst, implies that it's the routing of the cables, not necessarily the ESD cable itself.

Another point to consider -- the measurements show the lowest two pitch modes are effected by the cable routing, where the rest of the modes remain constant in frequency. This implies that it's the routing at the *upper stages* that it most effecting the stiffness. This maybe stating the obvious, because the number of cables between stage jumps decreases as you go down the chain -- more cables = more stiffness. However, it's worth pointing out, such that those routing know to focus on those connections for best results.

We will continue to investigate, and perhaps try to re-arrange the cabling, especially since we have the world's expert on QUAD Suspensions on site for the next few days.

Level control valves frozen -> I'll be in around noon and will turn on trace heat

Level control valves frozen -> I'll be in around noon and will turn on trace heat

This morning, we reapplied First Contact to the ITMyAR in order to pick off a smudge left behind from the sheet of FC pulled yesterday.  In fact, this smudge was apparently removed via this second application and removal, but 2 new ones were left behind.  These were further from the center than the first, closer to 2-3 inches in from the edge.  Since we had not pulled the sheet completely, we just pulled it back up and spot treated over the problem areas with more FC.  Then we waited for these to dry before pulling the sheet completely.  There was still a bit of residue left in a line at the edge of the sheet in numerous places along the circle.  It took numerous acetone swipes to remove them.

After watching the paint dry for most of the day we finally got the ITMy AR clean enough to proceed with mounting the reaction chain.  By COB, we had it mounted, lower cables laced and clamped, and a first round of suspending complete.  Because the main chain was clamped in likely a subpar alignment during this, we noted that a bump stop was touching between the chains.  We will hang the main and the reaction together tomorrow to diagnose the reason to for the touch and continue with reaction chain pitch alignment.

Attached are plots of dust counts > .5 microns.

Anamaria and Dave.

I copied Anamaria's L1 PEM EX model to create the H2 PEM EY model. This model was then built and installed on h2pemey.