H2:SUS-ETMY_M0_OFFSET_P etc. were changed to H2:SUS-ETMY_M0_OFFSET_P_OFFSET etc. yesterday, apparently, and ISC screen for TM offsets are now white.

More importantly, because of this, we can't trend the old alignment offsets from the past using data viewer. Thank you.

From OFFSET_P to OFFSET_P_OFFSET, and OFFSET_Y to OFFSET_Y_OFFSET. Sounds as if somebody decided that we needed to put a standard cds filter module just for the offset. I don't know why, but I can believe that there's some reason. Anyway , please talk to integration testers before making such a change next time.

Luke, Cheryl, Rodica

This morning we were planing to do measurements of the FR rotation at several input power levels, but we had to defer this until the AC issues inside PSL got solved and the temperature lowered down so that the PMC becomes stable again. Meanwhile, Cheryl and I prepared and assembled a set of posts and clamps to hold the cover over the HAM Aux-es.

The retaining rings for the FI half waveplate and DKDP came out of clean and bake in the afternoon and tomorrow we will assemble these two optics in their final mounts.

We also assembled the heat sinks for the TGG crystals and the DKDP holder and mount. Luke has been assembling the pico-motor half waveplate mount. I removed the alignment input iris as it was not useful anymore and mounted a power meter to measure the FI incident power.

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.

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.

   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.

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.

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%'