TJ, Camilla WP #12831

As it's been noted by the operators 87315 and we saw confusing HWS Live results 87341, today we swapped the ITMX HWS SLED, leaving ITMY as the signal appears stronger and we hope will last to the end of the run. 

Last swapped in May 84417, so this degraded quicker than usual.

Following the T1500193 procedure, and started the code back up with fresh references while we were in maintenance still.

• HWS starting values
  • Power as measured from fiber launcher: IX 0.7mW   IY 0.8mW
  • ITMX SLED removed - https://ics.ligo-la.caltech.edu/JIRA/browse/QSDM-790-5--00-11.21.382 
• HWS ending values
  • ITMX SLED installed: https://ics.ligo-la.caltech.edu/JIRA/browse/QSDM-790-5--00-01.24.077 2.5mW = 120mA = 480mV (on TP with 250mA/V) Max current set to 114mA
  • Power as measured from fiber launcher: IX 3.0mW   IY 1.0mW (unsure why it increased)

In the past we've calibrated H1:TCS-ITM{X,Y}_HWS_SLEDPOWERMON channel, but we didn't do this today.  SDF screenshot attached of the new current limit. 

Increased both ITMX and ITMY camera frame rate frequencies from 1Hz to 4Hz which is the lowest possible frequency without any saturated pixels. 

Making this alog, because it was not clear what hardware was used to install Access System Interlocks on the Optics Table Enclosures, so I'm making this alog for next time.

When I was recently asked to install innards to the upcoming new JAC (Jitter Attenuation Cavity) in-air Table Enclosure everything was fairly straightforward (internal cable trays, lights, & side vents), EXCEPT for the Access System panel/door magnets/interlocks (HS7A-DMC Non-Contact Magnetic)--I'd only installed a couple of these years ago (I didn't alog the handful I installed, most of them were installed by Ken [contractor]).  The main issue for some of the magnets there is only a tiny amount of material (1/8" thick) you can use to drill a screw into + you can't have it interfere with the panels or doors.

For the wired-magnets, it's tricky, because the screw length can't extend beyond the 1/8" thick aluminum frame brackets they are attached to or it will hit/interfere the panel/door (this isn't an issue for the magnets actually attached to panels/doors--their screw only goes into foam with no interference).   Also, as for types of screws to use, Richard suggested sheet metal screws and just screw them into the aluminum, but I could not drill them into aluminum with hand drill.  Ultimately, I drilled pilot holes, and then screwed the screws into these undersized holes by hand (not with drill).

Rummage in the Mechanical Room and EE lab to find screws that would work.  The best option I found in our supply was: 

3/8"-long conical head sheet metal screws + 2-washers as spacers (a regular phillips head screw would have been better (better contact with washers).  Now the screws only have about 1/16" of thread to engage the aluminum bracket; removing 1 (of 2) washers gives about 1/8", but that would have the screw tip flush or (possibly) poking out beyond the aluminum frame bracket.

NOTE:  We did NOT use self-tapping screws for this

Throwing in some photos to also help for next time.  Almost all interlocks have been installed on the JAC table, but I still need to install an interlock on each door.

A couple months ago (86253) I posted a huge list of all of the results from the satamp swaps that we had done up to that point. We've done some more swaps, so I have more results.

Swapped Sept 23, 2025 (87103)
PRM M2, M3
SRM M2, M3
BS M2
ITMX L1
ITMY L1
ETMY L1

PRM
swapped stages as of now: M1*, M2, M3 (* means swapped prior to 09/23)
M2
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPRM_M2_1442053782_1200.mat r12671
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPRM_M2_1442692939_1200.mat r12671
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPRM_M2_NoiseComparison_1442053782vs1442692939-1200.pdf r12671
M3
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPRM_M3_1442053782_1200.mat r12672
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPRM_M3_1442692939_1200.mat r12672
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPRM_M3_NoiseComparison_1442053782vs1442692939-1200.pdf r12672

SRM
swapped stages as of now: M1*, M2, M3
M2
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSRM_M2_1442053782_1200.mat r12673
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSRM_M2_1442692939_1200.mat r12673
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSRM_M2_NoiseComparison_1442053782vs1442692939-1200.pdf r12673
M3
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSRM_M3_1442053782_1200.mat r12674
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSRM_M3_1442692939_1200.mat r12674
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSRM_M3_NoiseComparison_1442053782vs1442692939-1200.pdf r12674

BS
swapped stages as of now: M1*, M2
M2
Still a bit noisy, but these were the quietest times we have where we didn't have anything coming out of DRIVEALIGN
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSBS_M2_1432488116_720.mat r12687
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSBS_M2_1443899058_720.mat r12687
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSBS_M2_NoiseComparison_1432488116vs1443899058-720.pdf r12687

ITMX
swapped stages as of now: R0*, M0*, L1
L1
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGL1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSITMX_L1_1442007359_1200.mat r12675
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGL1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSITMX_L1_1442833698_1200.mat r12675
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGL1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_L1_NoiseComparison_1442007359vs1442833698-1200.pdf r12675

ITMY
swapped stages as of now: R0*, M0*, L1
L1
** There is an issue with the satamp (S1100129) we swapped in here. There is elevated noise above 10 Hz, as can be seen in the plots. There are also spikes in noise above 10 Hz in the 'after' traces that aren't seen in the 'before' traces. This noise is seen in every 'after' time I tried, but not seen in any 'before' times. The issue looks to be in the UR channel (diaggui1, diaggui2). We will be trying to fix this by power cycling the satamp, otherwise we will swap it out with another satamp.
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGL1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSITMY_L1_1442007359_900.mat r12681
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGL1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSITMY_L1_1442892252_900.mat r12681
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGL1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_L1_NoiseComparison_1442007359vs1442892252-900.pdf r12681

ETMY
swapped stages as of now: R0*, M0*, L1
L1
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGL1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_L1_1442052701_1200.mat r12686
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGL1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_L1_1443890298_1200.mat r12686
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGL1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_L1_NoiseComparison_1442052701vs1443890298-1200.pdf r12686

Swapped Sept 30, 2025 (87225)
PR2 M2, M3
SR2 M2, M3

PR2
swapped stages as of now: M1*, M2, M3 (* means swapped prior to 09/30)
M2
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPR2_M2_1442539459_1200.mat r12682
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPR2_M2_1443551029_1200.mat r12682
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR2_M2_NoiseComparison_1442539459vs1443551029-1200.pdf r12682
M3
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPR2_M3_1442539459_1200.mat r12683
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSPR2_M3_1443551029_1200.mat r12683
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR2_M3_NoiseComparison_1442539459vs1443551029-1200.pdf r12683

SR2
swapped stages as of now: M1*, M2, M3
M2
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSR2_M2_1443134194_1200.mat r12684
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM2/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSR2_M2_1443463761_1200.mat r12684
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR2_M2_NoiseComparison_1443134194vs1443463761-1200.pdf r12684
M3
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSR2_M3_1443134194_1200.mat r12685
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM3/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSSR2_M3_1443463761_1200.mat r12685
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR2_M3_NoiseComparison_1443134194vs1443463761-1200.pdf r12685

With help from TJ, I migrated a majority of the ASC filters controlled by ISC_LOCK into an lscparams dictionary called asc_filters, and edited the filter engagement/disengagement commands in the guardian to call from this dictionary. Along the way, I also edited the lscparams asc_gains dictionary, and removed commented out code that seemed unnecessary or out of date.

New practice: each dictionary entry in asc_filters includes ALL filter bank settings that should be ON at a given time, so all filters to be engaged as well as OUTPUT, DECIMATION (INPUT as well, if it is supposed to be on). When filter changes are made, we can use the command ezca.get_LIGOFilter([DOF]).only_on(*lscparams.asc_filters[DOF][P/Y][NAME]). The names of the filter settings are named after the guardian state in which they are engaged, with some small edits if one guardian state has multiple filter engagement steps.

Example:

In PREP_ASC_FOR_FULL_IFO, CSOFT P filters are set up, but the input is left off until engagement in ENGAGE_SOFT_LOOPS. Then, after the loop is engaged and converged, FM1 is disengaged. Finally, in POWER_25W, FM3 is engaged as a boost.

The dictionary is set up as:

In PREP_ASC:

Therefore, when we make adjustments to ASC filters or gains, we will need to edit the dictionaries in lscparams. This will ensure that any changes also get picked up by the seismic guardian.

These are things that are not yet controlled by this dictionary:

• none of these ASC loops included offsets, so the filter bank settings do not engage the offsets. However, using the "only_on" command can disengage an offset, if it is not put into these settings.
• the ASC BLEND filters for the HARD and SOFT loops are still controlled outside of this dictionary
• I left MICH ASC filtersout of the dictionary for now, since its settings are first controlled by ISC_DRMI and then the loop is left on thereafter.

TJ is currently editing the seismic guardian to create the ASC higain state and then a state that takes ASC back to its lownoise state. Now, we can pull the gain and filters settings from these dictionaries!

WP12827 HLTS Estimator h1sus[pr3,sr3]

Jeff, Edgard, Brian L, Corey, Oli, Jonathan, Erik, Dave:

We installed Stanford's new h1sus[pr3,sr3] models and new MEDM screens. Each model added 255 slow and 37 fast channels to the DAQ. All the fast channels are acquired at 512Hz.

DAQ Restart

Jonathan, Dave:

The DAQ was restarted for the above model changes. No major issues, but both GDS needed a second restart.

The front bearing on the de-energized fan at End X was replaced this morning. The fan was jogged to ensure the vibration was resolved. 

M. Todd, C. Compton, S. Dwyer

I followed the steps layed out in alog 87316, and ran into OM suspension saturations before getting to start my measurement. I turned off the centering loops and cleared the integrators (you have to turn off OMC ASC and hit graceful clear history as well). Then turning them back on they seemed fine. I turned on the OMC ASC and set the LSC offset appropriately and then went out and turned off the sidebands.

We took scans for ITMX and ITMY about 25 minutes after the unlock, so we call this the HOT-ish (tepid) scan with CO2s on.

We then waited an hour with the ITMs realigned so that the HWS could track the defocus before taking another set of OMC scans.

We then turned the CO2s off and left the HWS aligned to watch the defocus change from them. ITMX HWS did not show a lot of change so upon examination it seems the SLED source is either dying or the CO2 is misaligned. TJ and Camilla are working on replacing the source to see if that will remedy things.

After an hour with the CO2s off we repeated the scans for each test mass for the final measurements.

Analysis will follow in a comment but I've attached the DTT screenshot below.

Matt, TJ, Sheila, Camilla

Today Sheila and Matt have been doing some IFO/CO2/OMC scan tests, in doing this we noticed the CO2X looked very misaligned, plots of CO2. However the SLED has degraded v. quickly since it was last swapped May: 84417, and even the IFO beam plots (120s and 7minutes) look a little strange and clipped.

We plan to replace this SLED before we decide if the CO2X is really misaligned or not. Procedure to realign CO2s with picos is: 68391, most recently blasted 2W for 2mins and waited ~10mins between pico moves. Last checked Oct 2024 80834 for ITMY and March 2024 for ITMX 75987

J. Oberling, R. Short

After the PSL pump diode operating current increase earlier this morning, we performed a rotation stage calibration.  The curve is attached, as well as the SDF update.  New parameters:

• Power in
  • Old: 70.0
  • New: 71.7781
• Parameter B
  • Old: -24.79
  • New: -24.8263
• All other parameters unchanged.

Tue Oct 07 10:04:49 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 4min 46secs

Gerardo confirmed a good fill curbside.

J. Oberling, R. Short

This morning we tweaked the operating current of the PSL 4S-HP amplifier pump diodes; this was done with the ISS OFF.  The tweaks can be seen in the attached plot.  End numbers:

• PMC Trans: ~106.9W
• PMC Refl: ~23.9W
• Amp2 output: ~140.0W
• Amp1 output: ~70.7W

With the ISS back ON, we had to decrease the RefSignal to -2.01 V to put the diffracted power % back at our usual 4% (this is due to the increase in power out of the PMC).

To end, we took the opportunity to tweak the beam alignment into the RefCav.  We started with a TPD of ~0.533V, and ended with a TPD of ~0.55V.

A rotation stage calibration will need to be performed due to the increased power out of the PMC.

TITLE: 10/07 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: TJ
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 2mph Gusts, 1mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.13 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

First things first, at Camilla's request, I did a PAUSE for TCS_ITM[x/y]_CO2_PWR Guardians---this was for a possible Matt T. test (he just walked in and was hoping for a recently-thermalized H1, but H1is only at NLN for 1.25hrs (he's contacting Sheila).

Other than that, preparing for Maintenance!

P.S. There was a dust alarm for one of the Optics Labs when I arrived

This is an alog I started before the power outage, because we were worried that the filter cavity backscatter was the reason for our intermittent squeezer noise.  (We now realize that the noise we are looking for is not from the filter cavity 87071.)

The overall message is that the filter cavity backscatter seems low compared to DARM, but there is a source of scattered light upstream of SFI2.

Filter cavity length

I've constructed a model of the filter cavity length loop using the foton filters for PRM in the CAL-CS model.  As noted in 78728 we need to modify the analog gains for M3 for FC2.  I've used a filter cavity pole of 34 Hz, and adjusted the sensor gain to get the model to match the measured open loop gain (plot).  The measurement used in that plot has poor coherence below 5 Hz, which explains why the model doesn't seem to fit there. This model also matches the cross over measured by injected at M1 LOCK L well (plot). 

The next plot shows the uncalibrated error signal (measured at LSC DOF2 IN1), with the loop correction applied (error_spectrum * (1-G)), and a line which I've added as a crude estimate of sensor noise.  You can see that there seems to be a bump in sensor noise around 100 Hz that isn't included in my rough estimate, I am not sure what that is.  

The next plot shows calibrated length noise. 

• The blue trace is the measured error signal calibrated using the sensing function found by fitting the open loop gain error_spectrum/sensing function
• The purple trace shows how the estimated sensor noise would be expected to contribute to that: sensor_noise_estimate * 1/(sensing function *(1-G)).  This is fairly close to the error signal above 8 Hz, so I've made an assumption that above 8 Hz the error spectrum is dominated by sensor noise, and that below 8 Hz the error spectum reflects the suppressed length noise that is not from this control loop (ie, ground motion, osems).  We could check the osem noise by doing injections.  
• The orange trace shows the loop corrected error signal, an estimate of what the noise would be if there were no loop: error_spectrum * (1-G)/ sensing function
• The green and red traces are the control signals for M1 and M3, calibrated by the plant models used in modeling the open loop gain and cross over measurements.  Plotting these was usefull for debugging the loop model and gaining confidence in the modeled sensing function, because they now roughly agree with the loop corrected error signal. (but they won't be used again here).
• The chartruse trace is an estimate of the sensor noise imposed on the filter cavity by the control loop, sensor noise * G/(sensing function *(1-G)).  This is roughly along the 
• The brown trace is the awnser, an estimate of the filter cavity length noise with this loop running.  This is the quadrature sum of the blue calibrated error signal below 8 Hz (asumming that is residual length noise where the loop is gain limited), and the chartruse estimated sensor noise imposed. 
• The pink shows the estimated RMS length noise of the filter cavity, 0.13 pm, dominated by the imposed sensor noise.  Page 21 of T1800447 states that 2.5 pm of RMS length noise would limit the squeezing at 50 Hz to 3dB, if we had 6 dB of squeezing and 12 dB of anti squeezing.  This level of rms length noise is probably OK.  
• section 8.2 of T1800447  estimates that the VCO noise is 1e-16 m/ rt Hz, small enough that we don't need to include it in this estimate. The sensing noise that I am estimating from looking at the error signal is nearly two orders of magnitude higher than the VCO noise which was used as the sensing noise in the loop modeling done in the design document. 

Backscattered power

Using the measurement of excitations on ZM2 in 86778,we can estimate the amount of backscattered light that is reaching the filter cavity.  The DCPD spectra, calibrated into RIN and with the DARM loop removed are plotted here and here with different FFT lengths.  Next time if we do this measurement with a lower frequency and higher amplitude excitation we will be able to use a longer FFT length for the plot and still se

I've made a model of the noise caused by backscattered light using equation 4 (and 5) from P1200155.  The excitation was a 1Hz 100 count excitation into test L, in the osems this showed a peak to peak amplitude of 0.37 um, and to go from optic motion to path length change we need roughly a factor of 4 since ZM2 is at a low angle of incidence and it is double passed.  To match the shelf frequency in the measurement I had to increase the amplitude used in the model by a factor of 3.4.  Using a QE of 100% gives a PD responsivity of 0.858 A/W, and 46.6mW of power on the OMC PDs.  This model doesn't include any phase modulation from any other elements in the optical path, but the real measurement does, which is why the measurements shows a nice shelf but the model shows a series of peaks when I use a longer FFT. I think would be less apparent if we make the measurement with a lower frequency higher amplitude excitation next time. 

The result of this shows that we have 12 pW of scattered light passing ZM2, since backscatter that reaches the filter cavity should all be reflected back towards the IFO along with the squeezing this means that we have 12 pW of scattered carrier from the OFI reaching the filter cavity.  Comparing this to table 1 of T1800447 this is a lower scattered light power reaching the diodes than expected, for a similar level of carrier light reaching the DC PDs, which suggests that all three Faradays are providing the isolation level expected or slightly better.  When driving ZM5, we get 12 nW of power scattered back to the interfometer, suggesting that there is a scattering source where we would not expect one to be.  This seems most likely to be upstream of SFI2, since we only expect nW of total scattered light downstream of SFI2.  If you are interested in looking at a diagram of possible scatters there is a VIP layout here, the beam which leaves B:M5 goes to a PD mounted on the ISI which is called B:PD1 and is intended to monitor light scattered from the OFI towards the squeezer.  

Coupling and noise projection

The last two plots here show the results of a filter cavity noise injection, similar to what Naoki did in 78579.  This suggests that this noise is large enough to include in our noise budget, but not nearly large enough to explain the excess noise we see in DARM when the filter cavity error signal is seeing extra noise. 

The code and data to produce this are in sheila.dwyer/SQZ/FilterCavity/fc_lsc_model.py

Firstly I am very sorry for the length of this alog

I needed to finish up the comparisons for the satamps that were swapped on Tuesday (86207), as well as rerun almost all of the other comparison damp regression plots for every suspension that has had its satamp swapped out for ECR E2400330, either with different times or with the loop suppression divided out. There were also multiple changes made to the damp_regression_compare.m file. So I've gone and done that, so here are the results in this master post. I will link to the old results when applicable. They are out of order as compared to when their satamps were swapped.

damp_regression_compare.m
Now creates a plot of the ratios, lists important IFO info, and saves some of the variables to a .mat file
found in /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/Common/MatlabTools/damp_regression_compare.m
newest version is r12583

Input
IM1
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM1_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM1_M1_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM1_M1_1437330256_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM1_M1_1438626136_1200.mat
r12561

IM2
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM2_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM2_M1_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM2_M1_1437330256_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM2_M1_1438626136_1200.mat
r12562

IM3
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM3_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM3_M1_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM3/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM3_M1_1437330256_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM3/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM3_M1_1438626136_1200.mat
r12563

IM4
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM4/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM4_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM4/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM4_M1_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM4/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM4_M1_1437330256_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM4/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM4_M1_1438626136_1200.mat
r12560

MC1(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M1_NoiseComparison_1437192600vs1437240215-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M1_1437192600vs1437240215-1200.mat
r12557

MC2(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC2_M1_NoiseComparison_1436631330vs1438441235-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC2_M1_1436631330vs1438441235-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC2_M1_1438441235_1200.mat
r12554

MC3(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M1_NoiseComparison_1437115850vs1437282002-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M1_1437115850vs1437282002-1200.mat
r12558

PRM(original results)(added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPRM_M1_NoiseComparison_1435154988vs1435435046-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPRM_M1_1435154988vs1435435046-1200.mat
r12559

PR2(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR2_M1_NoiseComparison_1435154988vs1436654703-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR2_M1_1435154988vs1436654703-1200.mat
r12556

PR3(original results)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M1_NoiseCompare_H1SUSPR3_M1_NoiseComparison_1435348334vs1435435046-1200.pdf
r12533
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M1_1435348334vs1435435046-1200.mat
r12565

BS(original results)(added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSBS_M1_NoiseComparison_1435062667vs1435435038-1200.pdf
r12535
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSBS_M1_1435062667vs1435435038-1200.mat
r12567
Data (new before time):
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSBS_M1_1435062667_1200.mat
r12535

Output
SRM(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSRM_M1_NoiseComparison_1435154988vs1435435046-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSRM_M1_1435154988vs1435435046-1200.mat
r12568

SR2(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR2_M1_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR2_M1_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12569

SR3(original results)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR3_M1_NoiseComparison_1435348334vs1435435046-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR3_M1_1435348334vs1435435046-1200.mat
r12570

OMC
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OMCS/H1/OMC/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSOMC_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330259vs1438454240-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OMCS/H1/OMC/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSOMC_M1_1437330259vs1438454240-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OMCS/H1/OMC/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSOMC_M1_1438454240_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OMCS/H1/OMC/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSOMC_M1_1437330259_1200.mat
r12582

SQZ
FC1
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSFC1_M1_NoiseComparison_1437766177vs1438449277-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSFC1_M1_1437766177vs1438449277-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSFC1_M1_1437766177_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSFC1_M1_1438449277_1200.mat
r12572

FC2
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSFC2_M1_NoiseComparison_1437766177vs1438449277-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSFC2_M1_1437766177vs1438449277-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSFC2_M1_1437766177_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSFC2_M1_1438449277_1200.mat
r12573

ITMs
ITMX M0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_M0_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_M0_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12574

ITMX R0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_R0_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_R0_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12575

ITMY M0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_M0_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_M0_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12576

ITMY R0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_R0_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_R0_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12577

ETMs
ETMX M0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_M0_NoiseComparison_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_M0_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.mat
r12578

ETMX R0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_R0_NoiseComparison_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_R0_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.mat
r12578

ETMX L1(original results)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGL1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_L1_NoiseComparison_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGL1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_L1_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.mat
r12579

ETMY M0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_M0_NoiseComparison_1436521059vs1438453617-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_M0_1436521059vs1438453617-1200.mat
r12580
Data (new after time):
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_M0_1438453617_1200.mat
r12548

ETMY R0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_R0_NoiseComparison_1436521059vs1438453617-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_R0_1436521059vs1438453617-1200.mat
r12580
Data (new before and after time):
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_R0_1436521059_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_R0_1438453617_1200.mat
r12550

TMSs
TMSX(original results)(added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSX/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSX_M1_NoiseComparison_1435150628vs1437199319-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSX/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSX_M1_1435150628vs1437199319-1200.mat
r12553

TMSY(original results)(added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSY/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSY_M1_NoiseComparison_1437213557vs1437257352-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSY/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSY_M1_1437213557vs1437257352-1200.mat
r12581

• ITMX: Superluminescent Diode QSDM-790-5 
  • S/N 06.18.001 - removed alog#61892 - will disposition*
  • S/N 06.18.002 - removed with 0.8mW alog#66179 - will keep as used spare. 
  • S/N 07.14.254 - removed alog#44201 - will disposition*
  • S/N 07.14.256 - removed alog#41411  - will disposition*
• ITMY: Superluminescent Diode QSDM-840-5
  • S/N 03.20.479 - new in sealed box
  • S/N 06.16.005 - new in sealed box
  • S/N 11.17.126 - removed with 0.19mW alog#66179  - will disposition*

* Added to ICS DEFECT-TCS-7753, will give to Chrisitna for dispositioning once new stock has arrived.