TITLE: 07/24 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Earthquake
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan C
SHIFT SUMMARY: Calibration and commissioning time today. We had one lock loss that ended a 21 hour lock, and now an earthquake is rolling through delaying relocking.
LOG:

• 1501 Commissioning calibration start
• 1932 Observing
• 1956-1957 Dropped observing because the sqz FC unlocked and then relocked by itself
• 2227 Out of observing to load calibration filters and run a quick broad band measurement
• 2237 Lock loss
  • Reacquisition
    • Decided to run an initial alignment almost immeditately. ALS looked misaligned and the AS air camera also looked bad. After a long lock this is generally needed as well.
    • Then an earthquake started to roll through and delayed reacq. a bit

I reported in a comment to alog 85961 that I pushed a new calibration today based on report 20250719T225835Z. However, I made a mistake: I did not load the CAL CS model after this push. This load includes changes to gains and filters in the CAL CS model that are important for the calibration. We went back into observing because an unloaded model does not prevent us from observing, and I was not aware that I needed to do this! I found out about this mistake when Dave brought the unloaded filter changes to my attention.

Overall, the differences were small, but they were clearly enough to make a difference. With permission, we left observing, loaded the model, and TJ ran a broadband PCAL measurement. I have attached a comparison of the three broadbands from today. Green is the failed push of the 6/28 report, blue was what I thought was a successful push of the 7/19 report, and then red shows the result after we loaded the model.

Therefore, the 2% uncertainty at 20 Hz that I noted in my previous alog was due to having the wrong filters in CAL CS, and we don't have any problems with the L2/L3 crossover.

So, as a note to myself for the future, make sure to load the CAL CS model before observing.

We have been reporting in various alogs about locklosses where the yaw ASC signals have a large motion right before lockloss (85935, 85841, 85948). I have narrowed it down to the TMSX suspension moving largely in yaw. TMSX yaw moves first, and the ASC signals follow. The TMS servo, which adjusts the TMSX TEST offsets to center the beam on the TMS QPDs follows the TMSX yaw motion. We can see that the F2, F3 and F1 oseminf outputs move by about a half a micron just before these locklosses. However, the MASTER OUTs don't see a large drive, so this is something that the sensor is seeing.

There is also no movement in the HEPI IPS, ISI GS13 or ISI CPSs, which leads us to believe this is due to something at the suspension level.

TITLE: 07/24 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Earthquake
OUTGOING OPERATOR: TJ
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: EARTHQUAKE
    Wind: 22mph Gusts, 12mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 1.49 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.24 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

• We just lost lock, and now we're getting some earthquakes from eastern Russia
• Wind is moderate and is forecast to increase until ~11pm PST / 23:00 UTC

Thu Jul 24 10:09:37 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 9min 33secs

1437431869

Ending a 21 hour lock. No obvious cause, lock loss tool analyzing.

FAMIS 26053, last checked in alog85829

The script reports BSC high frequency noise is elevated for the following sensors:

ITMY_ST1_CPSINF_H3

FAMIS 31095

Late to this check this week, but not too much to report. Jason's incursion last week for an FSS tuneup (alog85769) is clearly seen, and generally things have been stable since. Only strangeness is a noisier FSS TPD signal as of about 2 days ago, which I looked a little closer into.

Zooming in on the FSS TPD signal during an observing period (see second to last attachment), these look to be brief jumps in power on the TPD on the order of 20-30mV that I don't see evidence of anywhere else; AMP2 output, PMC output, and ISS actuation all seem nominal during these times. These jumps look to be happening constantly any time the IFO is at or above the 'LOCKING_ALS' steps, and it was during this step during relocking after Tuesday maintenance when the jumps first started. The only thing that changed during Tuesday's maintenance period that might have an effect is the sat amp modifications to MC1 and MC3 (alog85922), possibly changing something about the IMC's feedback to the FSS? See final attachment for behavior while the IFO is unlocked and the FSS TPD signal goes quiet. I've been watching the RefCav REFL camera spot while these jumps happen, and I do notice a very slight shift of the spot, but not a change in shape. I'm not sure how to explain this behavior or why it would have started, but at least so far it hasn't seemed to be much of a "problem," although I'll be keeping an eye on it.

Summary: I didn't see any conclusive difference that showed we could get an improvement from a change in a particular direction. Since the optical gain moves around so much its hard to see the effect of small or quick changes. It might be worth doing a longer test were we step these offsets in sets of three different values per dof (3*4 steps) and do each for five mins (~ 1 hour).

I orginally was trying to use the results of our last injection (2025-06-16 20:41:15 UTC to2025-06-16 21:01:57 UTC ) to determine how to change the OMC ASC alignment.

Using /ligo/home/jennifer.wright/git/2025/OMC_Alignment/20250116_OMC_Alignment_EXC.xml we injected four low frequency lines into H1:OMC-ASC_{POS,ANG}_{X,Y}_EXC - these channels come after the filter banks (ASC-OMC_A_PIT_OFFSET, then ASC-OMC_B_PIT_OFFSET, then ASC-OMC_A_YAW_OFFSET, then ASC-OMC_B_YAW_OFFSET) where the nominal offsets are set. The injection is at four different frequencies (0.0113, 0.0107, 0.0097 and 0.0103 Hz).

The analysis then involves looking at the 410 Hz line height on the OMC DCPD SUM to interpret the effect on optical gain.

However it is not clear from this plot that the full range of phase space has been looked at - ie we have not changed the offset with a large enough amplitude to check their current position is optimal.

Thus today I stepped ASC-OMC_A_PIT_OFFSET, then ASC-OMC_B_PIT_OFFSET, then ASC-OMC_A_YAW_OFFSET, then ASC-OMC_B_YAW_OFFSET - these filter banks are before the ones used above in the model and are the ones where the offset for the QPDs is set. In the

Towards the last three measurements we realised that we need to do larger changes ~0.04 counts to see a change in kappa C then wait for 3-4 mins. On the long term trend none of these changes seemed to produce any meausurable gain, but it would be good to repeat this measurement with longer times spent at each step and perhaps go in slightly larger steps.

The ndscope template is in /ligo/home/jennifer.wright/git/2025/OMC_Alignment/20250724_change _offsets_by_hand.yaml

• 1st March - 1st April (32 days) 14/75 (2.3 LL/day) = 19% ETM_GLITCH
• 11th - 29th June (18 days): 9/42 (2.3 LL/day) = 22% ETM_GLITCH
• 1st to 24th July (24 days): 13/60 (2.5 LL/day) = 22% ETM_GLITCH

Looking just in the last 10 days where we feel we've been having more locklosses:

• July 14th to 24th (10 days): 6/29 (2.9 LL/day) = 21% ETM_GLITCH

I lowered the L2 calibration line height by a factor of 2.2- the measurement uncertainty was around 0.0007, and our target is 0.002. Now the uncertainty seems to lie around 0.0016. I updated the guardian and SDF with the new injection amplitude- 3.5.

Ran a broad band (171106UTC), then a simulines. This was after running a serparate bb and start of a simulines that I had to bail out of because I had not gone back to NLN_CAL_MEAS. This allowed Elenna and Sheila to decide on something else and we reran after they made some changes.

Simulines start:

PDT: 2025-07-24 10:16:43.573765 PDT
UTC: 2025-07-24 17:16:43.573765 UTC
GPS: 1437412621.573765

Simulines end:
PDT: 2025-07-24 10:40:03.824053 PDT
UTC: 2025-07-24 17:40:03.824053 UTC
GPS: 1437414021.824053

Files:

2025-07-24 17:40:03,654 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250724T1
71644Z.hdf5
2025-07-24 17:40:03,661 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_2025
0724T171644Z.hdf5
2025-07-24 17:40:03,666 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_2025
0724T171644Z.hdf5
2025-07-24 17:40:03,670 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_2025
0724T171644Z.hdf5
2025-07-24 17:40:03,675 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_2025
0724T171644Z.hdf5

Sheila, Camilla

TITLE: 07/24 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan S
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 4mph Gusts, 1mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.06 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Locked for 13 hours. Temps look good, no alarms, calm environment. Planned calibration and commissioning time today from 1500-1930UTC (0800-1230PT).

TITLE: 07/24 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 148Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY: One lockloss with an automated recovery. We've been locked for 3.5 hours.
LOG: NO log.

• 00:07 UTC Observing, there was a big YAW excursion and ringdown seen in ASC during INJECT_SQZING
• 00:08 UTC lockloss
  • 01:36 UTC Observing

Writting this down for tomorow because we may have to repeat this at some point. We'd like to get a cross correlation measurement to high frequency when the IFO has been thermalized for 4+ hous.  Tomorow we can do this earlier in the lock if need be to make sure that everything works.

From sitemap OMC > DCPD TEST (at the bottom of list), open the INMTRX circled here, add a 1 where shown here

Take SQZ_MANAGER to NO_SQUEEZING

cd /ligo/home/sheila.dwyer/Noise_Budget_repos/quantumnoisebudgeting

open dtt template in /data_files/higher_order_modes.xml  run it at roughly the same time that you run this script adapted from Elena 85817

conda activate labutils

python get_OMCDCPS_524kHz.py

save the dtt template when finished.

Side note, it seems that we can only access two of these 524kHz test points with the script, and also only two at a time with dtt. So we will use dtt to save the sum spectra and the script to save the inidividual PDs.

Prompted by me noticing on-off behaviors in the daily strain spectrogram for today at around 20.2 Hz, I've done some additional investigations into the source and behavior of this line: 

The 20.2 Hz line, which is currently prominent in DARM, first appeared in accelerometer and microphone data from the corner station on June 9. The first appearance of this line that I found was in the PSL mics, as shown in this spectrogram. This line then appeared in DARM in the first post-vent locks a few days later. The summary of work from June 9 does not show anything obvious to me that would be the source of this new noise.

This feature also turns off and on multiple times during the day. An example from today can be seen in this spectrogram. Most corner station microphones and accelerometers exhibit this feature, but it is most pronounced visually in the PSL microphone spectrograms. I was unable to identify any other non-PEM channels that showed the same on-off behavior, but this does reveal many change points that should aid in tracking down the source. Almost every day, this line exhibits abrupt on-off features at different times of the day and for varying durations. Based on my initial review, these change points appear to be more likely during the local daytime (although not at any specific time).  When the line first appeared, it was usually in the "off" state and then turned on for short periods. However, this has slowly changed, so that now the line is generally in the "on" state and turns off for brief periods. 

Preeti, Gaby

With the help of Ashley Patron's Eqlock script, we calculated the locklosses caused due to EQs for each observing runs. This is a part of the study of investigating the correlation between the microseism and duty-cycle (alog), so we chose winter months (Nov, Dec, Jan and Feb) of each observing run and calculated the vertical velocity of the ground from z-channel and horizontal velocity which is the quadrature sum of x and y channels at the time of locklost due to an EQ. We also did the same study for LLO (alog). 

Conclusion:

• The scatter plots between the peak horizontal velocity and peak vertical velocity during the EQs shows that at Hanford, the horizontal ground motion is more or less similar to the vertical ground motion.
• An attached table has the information about the total number of EQs during each observing runs' winter and the probability of surviving lock during the EQ along with the number of locklosses due to EQ and surviving events. The probability of surviving lock during an EQ for O2 winter was 30%, O3b winter was 54%, O4a winter was 31% and O4b winter was 28%.
• Furthermore, we calculated cumulative distribution function for each observing run and the plot shows the probability of staying lock during EQ events with the horizontal and vertical ground motions has been decreased in O4 winters in compare with O3 winter.