TITLE: 03/21 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Aligning
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:
H1's been having issues staying locked for more than 45-90 minutes in the last day. Acquisition is decent, although most lock attempts I have proactively went to CHECKMICHFRINGES + PRMI. LOCK CLOCK is not working. Automatic Operation appeared to not work once, but for other couple of attempts it worked.
LOG:
For the first lock of tonight's shift, noticed that the Lock Clock (or Lock Status) on nuc28would only go to "0:01" and stop during the entirety of the (45min lock). I tried running the Lock Status script on my local computer and it would do the same thing....so this is why I did not restart nuc28.
(Later I also noticed that for the next lock, when I set GRD_IFO to Automatic Operation, this node did not take H1 to OBSERVING.)
Just had almost 90min of a lock. And for this lockloss, ITMx ISI had a CPS watchdog trip. Winds are much more calmer tonight than last night.
As shown in the attachment, I turned on the beam spot control. The flag of the beam spot control in sqzparams is set to True. The beam spot control seems working well, but I feel the yaw was too slow so I removed the -20dB gain (FM7 in INJ_ANG_Y). I will tune the green QPD offset with FC2 dither tomorrow.
I tuned the green QPD offset as shown in the attachment. The FC IR trans is 0.1 with -12dBm CLF6 now, but it was 0.1 with -26dBm CLF6 in O4a so it is better to align the IR trans PD.
I tuned the green QPD offset a bit.
[Jennie, Gabriele]
We tried again to move the input beam.
For pitch, we directly ramped IM1, IM3, IM4, PRM and PR2 with sliders deltas measured from the test yesterday. IM1 and IM3 were the mirrors we move yesterday, while the other were moved by ASC loops. Today with the ramp we helped the ASC loops by moving those mirrors in the right direction too. We first diod one step 1/10th of the target step, then 2/10th and then the remaining 7/10th. All went well: IM4_TRANS increased, but we did not see much change in POP_LF. However ASC-POP_B dropped near the end of the ramp, while ASC-POP_A didn't, so maybe we were moving near the edge of B.
We then started a motion in yaw (both IM1 and IM3 negative). This seems a very good direction, and both IM4 and POP_LF got better quickly. However, right after we started the second step, we lost lock. This is similar to what happened in the previous test. We should probably move more slowly in yaw, but it worth repeating the test, since we are gaining power in POP_LF and arms.
During a previous alignment test aimed at reducing jitter (76461) we observed that a yaw input beam PZT excitation had the largest coupling to DARM. This is consistent with the observation here that a yaw motion of the input beam has a large effect on build-ups. We might have a yaw misalignment of the input beam.
I think we normally use a pitch IMC signal to subtract jitter, but both yaw and pitch IMC signals are coherent with DARM, so probably that's not telling us much and it is still consistent with a yaw misalignment.
During the pitch beam motion, we noticed that the PRM camera servo seems to overshoot the optimal buildups: so we might have to retune the camera offset once we find a better input beam aligment
H1 is now in NLN and I just ACCEPTED the one OMC diff (see attached) related to the OMC Frequency per (alog #76587 from Louis earlier today).
Updated notes from incorrect 73801 SQZ NLG instructions
To measure amplified signal for NLG:
To measure unampilifed signal for NLG:
Calculation for NLG:
TITLE: 03/21 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Commissioning
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 12mph Gusts, 7mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.23 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
TITLE: 03/21 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Aligning
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY: Five locklosses today, two known and three unknown.
LOG:
1500 Detector has been Locked for 9.5 hours
1555 Lockloss (unknown)
1633 We were going through CHECK_MICH_FRINGES so I took us to DOWN and then started an INITIAL_ALIGNMENT
1653 INITIAL_ALIGNMENT done, relocking
1738 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
1805 Lockloss (unknown)
1846 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
1934 Lockloss (unknown)
- Multiple locklosses from LOCKING_ALS and ENGAGE_DRMI_ASC, and DRMI/PRMI locklosses
- Ran MANUAL_INITIAL_ALIGNMENT for MICH, PRC, SRC
2041 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
2115 Lockloss (During InLock SUS Charge Measurements)
2158 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
2246 Lockloss (from commissioning)
- Running an INITIAL_ALIGNMENT
Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
15:30 | Richard | roof | n | Looking for a signal | 15:33 | |
15:41 | FAC | Karen | OptLab, VacPrep | n | Tech clean | 16:35 |
16:57 | SHG | Julian | OpticsLab | y(local) | SHG work | 19:24 |
18:13 | FAC | Eric | EY | n | Investigating excess noise | 18:35 |
18:16 | EE | Marc, Fil | EY | n | Swapping accelerometer connector&looking for noise | 19:58 |
18:44 | Janos, Gerardo | EY | n | Investigate noise | 19:32 | |
18:55 | SQZ | Camilla | CR | n | SQZ step tests | 19:25 |
20:45 | SHG | Julian | Optics Lab | y(local) | More SHG | 23:10 |
22:59 | VAC | Gerardo | MX | n | Check out cable trays | 00:29 |
23:14 | RUN | Gabriele | ARMS | n | Running 16km | 01:14 |
I created a script update_sus_safesnap.py saved in $(USERAPPS)/isc/h1/guardian/ that updates the OPTICALIGN_{P,Y}_OFFSET values saved in the safe.snap files for the optics. These values are not monitored by SDF, but we still want these to be reasonably up-to-date for when computer issues mess up our offsets.
This script can be found in $(USERAPPS)/isc/h1/scripts/update_sus_safesnap.py and can be run from the terminal for many different optics or optic groups (attachment1). The default when no arguments are entered is to update the OPTICALIGN_{P,Y}_OFFSET values in safe.snap for the following: IMs, RMs, MCs, PRs, BS, SRs, OMs, TMSs, ETMs, and ITMs (basically everything except squeezer optics).
I have also added new states to the end of ALIGN_IFO(attachment2) and INIT_ALIGN(attachment3) called UPDATE_SAFE_SNAP that when selected, will update the OPTICALIGN_{P,Y}_OFFSET values in safe.snap for the default optic groups. We are still unsure as to how often this should be run, since we don't want to overwrite offset values with those from a bad initial alignment and lock, but we'll figure that out eventually. For now it will have to be selected either while the ALIGN_IFO OR INIT_ALIGN nodes are in DOWN or when INIT_ALIGN is at INIT_ALIGN_COMPLETE.
EvanH, FranciscoL
Because we've been loosing lock for unknown reasons, we measured OLG transfer function of MICH, SRLC, and PRLC. The UGF for each one is (see attached figures for reference) roughly
MICH: 10 Hz
SRCL: 12 Hz
PRCL: 35 Hz
We may want to lower the MICH UGF to avoid cross coupling with the SRCL loop.
The Michelson loop is probably showing a cross-coupling with either PRCL or SRCL. The attachment shows a hump in the OLTF around 60 Hz that scales nonlinearly with overall loop gain changes. Green is the current situation, with the UGF close to 10 Hz, which is also where the SRCL UGF is.
Recall that we had previously reduced the Michelson UGF and applied some antiboosting, but this was reverted during higher-power operation. I am now more or less restoring this reduced UGF operation (UGF 5.5 Hz, antiboosting that amounts to 6 dB less gain below 1 Hz). This uses LSC-MICH1 FM8. The new OLTF is pink in the attachment.
SDFs in OBSERVE.snap table on the LSC model following Evan's work. New filter and gain accepted, ramp time reverted.
On/off testing shows some mild improvement in the 18–23 Hz region, possibly because of less drive around the BS bounce mode. We may want to re-engage the bounce/roll notches in this length loop.
Also, it seems like the drive to the BS coils above 10 Hz is actually dominated by pitch drive. Someone may want to redo the plant inversion for the ASC-MICH_P loop, as it appears to be much more aggressive than the yaw loop.
Regarding the ASC MICH P drive, I was looking into updating the filter and realized there is a sneaky 17 Hz low pass filter on BS M2 Lock P and Y. Gabriele and I did not take this filter into account when redesigning the MICH ASC filters (69370). Just adding this additional filter into the model shows quite a bit of gain peaking around 3 Hz. I'm not sure if that's actually the big problem here, but clearly this could use a redesign. I'll work on it, and also check the MICH Y control design.
Edit: actually, that might not be that much of a problem after all. We could probably improve some low frequency suppression, but I don't know how much we can reduce the pitch drive above 10 Hz. After correcting the model according to my measurement in 72117, there is not much gain peaking and a good amount of phase and gain margin. Yes, the plant inversion is aggressive, but it seems to be working. Attached a screenshot from Gabriele's loop designer code, where I have implemented the BS M2 pitch model, BS M2 locking filters, and current ASC MICH P control design. Black dots/stars in the top left plot are the Zs/Ps of the plant model and locking filters, red dots/stars are the Zs/Ps of the control loop filters. The UGF is around 1 Hz as I measured, and there is 5 dB of gain peaking at 2 Hz (top right plot).
We tried the in-lock charge measurements but forgot about the New-DARM configuration so caused a lockloss in the SWAP_TO_ITMX state.
It seems also that only ETMY was ever moved during the part of the test that did run (I'd expect everything but ETMX measured, because the last one requires switching control to the other TM which caused lock loss). In the measurement last week, it seems excitation was applied on all masses as it should be. Attached are plots from this week and last week.
I've attached the plots for ETMY, since that's the only one that had the excitations this last week.
Looking at last night lock stretch [1395051437, 1800 seconds]
https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~gabriele.vajente/bruco_1395051437_GDS_CALIB/
Lot of coherence with CHARD_Y, maybe a consequence of 76541
Lot of coherence with MICH and PRCL. and SRCL. What changed in the feed forward?
Another BruCo using last night Observing mode period: https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~gabriele.vajente/bruco_1395052218_GDS_CALIB/
Results are similar, so it was not due to some bad period. There is high coherence with PRCL too: either that's due to MICH cross coupling, or as Elenna suggests there might be something wrong with PRCL that also increases the CHARD noise (we saw in the past that CHARD noise increased when PRCL optical gain dropped)
At 11:15AM the Juniper SRX was found to have stopped communicating on the 198.129.208.0/24 and 198.129.209/24 GC Compute subnets respectively. This was found to have been configured as residing on LAG ae0 at the router to LAG ae3 on the switch and vlans 3 and 4. All routes were found to have traversed this link in common. Physical reset of interfaces, by physically removing fiber and SFP+ Transceivers from the Juniper SRX-4100 at ports xe-0/0/2 and xe-0/0/3, waited 30 seconds, reseated the transceivers, and reconnected the fiber. Immediate restoration of lost services was observed. There was no observable information in the message logs on the SRX or on the CORE switch to indicate any problem. Interface reset was diagnosed by observable traffic flows. No other information is available. Outage secured at 12:30PM 3/21/2024
Onsite internet has been down for about 1.5 hours now and CDS and GC are working on bringing it back
Internet has been restored!
Sheila, Camilla
We started to repeat the ADF scan from 76561 after the IFO had been locked only ~20minutes. Using 'ezcastep H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE -s '180' '+6,12'', lost lock before the scan finished. Leaving H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE to 100 so we can do this again once relocked.
Plan to repeat once the IFO is thermalized (~4+ hours). In theory the optimum ADF phase setting shouldn't change, want to confrim this.
Restarted 180s steps of 6deg at 18:52UTC, NLN since 18:45UTC. Again lost lock before we could take a thermalized data set but there seems like a lot of rotation that could be an indication of the SRCL detuning changing as we powerup.
Naoki and I are leaving H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE at 118deg but still want to redo the scan with a thermalized IFO.
[Gabriele, Sheila, Louis]
We changed the OMC lock dither frequency to 4190 Hz.
As mentioned in LHO:76582, we moved the OMC Lock dither frequency from 4100 Hz to 4101 Hz and saw the 4Hz bump in the OMC lock control loop error signal, H1:OMC-LSC_I_OUT
, move to 5Hz as the ramp progressed.
This confirms that the 4Hz bump was due to mixing between the frequency of the OMC lock dither (nominally, 4100 Hz) and the 4096 Hz. It's not completely clear why 4096 Hz is special now but we note that it's equal to 16384 Hz / 4. This bump wasn't present in O4a so why is here now?
In any case, moving the lock dither frequency up to 4190Hz should take care of this issue. We expect the bump to move up to 94Hz, well above the UGF of the OMC lock loop where it won't dominate the error signal RMS.
We also had to change a band pass filter in OMC-LSC_PD_IN, to center around 4190 Hz instead of 4100 Hz. The old band pass is FM7, the new is FM8. If we stick to 4190 Hz dither, we need to update guardian.
The bump at 4 Hz in the OMC error signal is gone.
I accepted the new dither frequency and bandpass filter settings in SDF (observe and snap).
And indeed the bump moved to 94 Hz
[Jennie, Louis, Gabriele]
This morning we carried out some tests to understand if the excess DARM noise could be OMC length noise. We increased the OMC in-lock residual length RMS (by changing the loop gain and by injecting a 4 Hz line), and changed the OMC lock offset. We expect the coupling from OMC length to DARM to scale linearly with both the RMS and the offset.
More details will follow in comments, but we increased the OMC length RMS by about a factor 10 and saw no visible change in the DARM noise in the bucket. We also added several lock offsets and saw no change in DARM noise in the bucket.
So the DARM excess noise is not OMC length noise.
During the test we injected a 135 Hz OMC length line, and checked that the coupling scales as expecetd with the RMS and the offset.
We lost lock at the end of the ramp when we were changing the OMC length dither frequency from 4100 Hz to 4101 Hz with a 30 second ramp. We saw that the 4 Hz bump in the error signal was moving toward 5 Hz during the ramp: this confirms that the origin of the 4 Hz bump is due to some "beat" between 4100 Hz and 4096 = 16348/4 Hz
We measured the DARM / OMC_PZT transfer function at 135 Hz during the offset tests, and found a very linear trend without any significant offset, as expected
Test times
Reference quiet time 1395060517 1395061305
Gain change test
gain 24 1395062380 1395062849
gain 12 1395063409 1395064053
gain 48 1395064462 1395064825
4 Hz injection
gain 0.0015 1395065763 1395066089
gain 0.0030 1395066112 1395066455
gain 0.0060 1395066476 1395066784
gain 0.0120 1395066802 1395067093
Offset test
100e-6 1395068536 1395068841
200e-6 1395068876 1395069277
300e-6 1395069301 1395069708
0 1395069732 1395070085
-100e-6 1395070107 1395070514
-200e-6 1395070532 1395070878
-300e-6 1395070904 1395071331
The graphs where we increased the gain of the OMC length loop are shown in the first image.
The graphs where we we dithered athe OMC PZT2 at 4Hz with increasing amplitude (while keeping loop gain constant at 24) are shown in the second image
The graphs where we offset the OMC loop error point - ie. changed the error point on the fringe we lock to is shown in the third image, while keeping the loop gain constant.
The top trace is DARM-DELTAL_EXTERNAL_DQ calibrated into m/root Hz using the calibration on the 15th March.
The bottom is the error point of the OMC length loop taken at OMC-LSC_I_OUT_DQ.
Fourth graph is because I had to remeasure the 100e-6 offset again starting at 1395068244 GPS as there was a glitch somewhere in the 1395068536 GPS measurement.
All measurements used 289 averages, BW 0.5 Hz, 50 % overlap and so each measurement used 290s in total.
In addition to the BSC10 accelerometer, the amount of floor motion also increases over the past 6 weeks, though not in a sudden fashion.
This does not correspond to the time of the most recent fan swap, judging by fan accelerometers.
New EX and EY Accelerometer Power Conditioners were installed 30 January 2024. This is roughly the same time as some of these jumps in the trend. The EY BSC 10 accelerometer cable had a questionable connector but still functioned so I believe we left it, it may need to be replaced.
https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=75592
We replaced the loose connector but did not see any effect on the signal. While down there we looked at the output and found that channel 5 output was very noisy, and looking back at the notes in my prior ALOG, channel 5 = PEM EY BSC ACC X and back then it did not register as an accelerometer. I assume this accelerometer is not functional or the cabling is not correct. We plan to go back on Tuesday and track down the issue with this accelerometer and possibly repair the channel in the power conditioner chassis.
Other notes
The INPUT to CH3 on the power conditioner is "TBL-Y" accelerometer cable. When unplugged this affected "BSC-Y" signal plot.
The INPUT to CH4 on the power conditioner is "BSC-Z" accelerometer cable. When unplugged this affected "BSC-Z" signal plot. (this one was correct)
Looking back at my analysis of the drawings in the linked ALOG, the above note matches the drawings in the DCC D1300773. I propose we assume the cables are swapped incorrectly but labeled correctly, and we rearrange the cables to match the drawing.
Marc, Fil, Gerardo, Janos
Refer to LHO:76728.
The lock clock issue seems to be stemming from an issue with the LLA system, which appears to have crashed sometime yesterday (LLA medm screenshot attached, tagging CDS)