Calibration was run between 06/16 05:25 and 05:53 UTC
Calibration monitor screenshot
Broadband (2024/06/16 05:25 - 05:30 UTC)
File: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20240616T052532Z.xml
Simulines (2024/06/16 05:32 - 05:53 UTC)
Files:
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20240616T053211Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20240616T053211Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20240616T053211Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20240616T053211Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20240616T053211Z.hdf5
06/16 05:24 UTC I took us out of Observing to run a calibration sweep that we weren't able to run earlier.
06/16 06:05 UTC Back into Observing after running calibration sweep and tuning squeeze
Currently Observing at 152 Mpc and have been Locked for 55 mins. We had a lockloss at 06/16 00:01 UTC, 22 minutes into NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE, and relocking required me helping with PRMI and DRMI, but we were able to get up eventually. The wind is slowly going down and is around 25mph now.
Lockloss @ 06/16 00:01UTC (LDAS currently down so no link). We had only been locked for 20 minutes and I was trying to get the SQZ OPO to lock, so we had not been in Observing. There was a small jump up in wind at that time, but not sure if that would have caused the LL
01:56 UTC Observing
Went back out of Observing for ten minutes (02:01 - 02:10 UTC) to tune sqz because our range was 147Mpc. Now back in Observing at 154 Mpc
TITLE: 06/15 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Wind
INCOMING OPERATOR: Oli
SHIFT SUMMARY:
IFO is in and is locking at LOWNOISE_COIL_DRIVERS
Wind gusts have been high since the last lockloss and per usual, I would put H1 in down when the wind would go higher than 30mph and wait for oppurtunistic low-wind periods to lock ALS - here's a timeline since the last LL. The only sdf revert I had to accept was in my midshift alog 78457
All times are UTC
19:31 - NLN/Observing Lockloss
19:38 - ALS Lockloss
19:39 - DOWN due to 40-50mph winds
21:43 - Attempt to re-lock due to wind speeds below 30mph
22:08 - Two failures at MICH_FRINGES and no ability to lock PRMI let alone DRMI - decied to run initial alignment
22:25 - Initial Alignment done fully auto, attempt to relock - winds picking up about to surpass 30mph
22:41 - DOWN again after 2 ALS locklosses and 3 IR Locklosses, with winds around 35mph.
22:54 - Saw small oppurtunistic sub 30mph calmness (that only lasted 10 mins) and decided to try locking again - it worked!
23:02 - DRMI locked!
23:30 - Shift ended while in LOWNOISE_COIL_DRIVERS
LOG:
None
TITLE: 06/15 Eve Shift: 2300-0800 UTC (1600-0100 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Wind
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 28mph Gusts, 21mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.05 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Relocking and at DARM_TO_RF
IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 18:29 UTC
We lost lock 2 hours after reaching observing at 16:56 UTC due to unknown reasons. The range was definitely lower than usual and while I was attempting to investigate this using Sheila and TJ's new wiki low range checks page, we had our initial lockloss. SDF Table of acceptances is attached.
After PRMI failed, I ran an initial alignment and then we locked swiftly despite winds in the high 20's and low 30's (mph). The range is still quite low now but I will wait the recommended hour or two (per Sheila's instruction) until IFO is thermalized enough to run the low range check dtt.
Wind forecast show gusts are expected to continue picking up until around 4PM so here's hoping we don't need to lock ALS during that time!
Sat Jun 15 10:10:28 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 10min 25secs
TITLE: 06/15 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 19mph Gusts, 15mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.05 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
IFO is LOCKING at MOVE_SPOTS
IFO was mid auto relock from its last lockloss at 12:56 UTC when I arrived. Expect to get locked and observing soon.
HAM4 annulus ion pump signal railed about 7:50 utc 06/15/2024. No immediate attention is required, per trend of PT120, an adjecent gauge, the internal pressure does not appear to be affected. HAM4 AIP will be assesed next Tuesday.
TITLE: 06/15 Eve Shift: 2300-0800 UTC (1600-0100 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 148Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY: We are Observing at 150 Mpc and have been locked for 13 hours now. Super quiet shift with no issues.
LOG:
23:00 Detector Observing and Locked for over 4 hours
Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
23:31 | PCAL | Francisco | PCAL Lab | y(local) | Putting covers on | 23:33 |
We are Observing at 154 Mpc and have been Locked for over 9 hours. Nothing to note
We continue the activities with the experimental vacuum chamber in the Mechanical Room, along the Eastern-wall. Now we are running another scroll pump there. Similarly to the already running one, a foam is placed underneath it. In the meantime, the bakeout of this chamber's RGA has been finished.
TITLE: 06/14 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Oli
SHIFT SUMMARY:
IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 21:33 UTC.
21:07 UTC to 21:33 UTC: COMISSIONING
19:28 UTC to 21:07 UTC: OBSERVING
Things of note:
LOG:
Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
15:29 | PCAL | Tony | Pcal Lab | Local | LLO Measurements | 17:59 |
16:33 | PCAL | Francisco | Pcal Lab | Local | LLO Measurements | 17:21 |
17:13 | SQZ | Sheila | LVEA | Y | Move magnetometer | 17:59 |
19:03 | PCAL | Tony, Miriam | PCAL Lab | N | LLO Measurements | 19:55 |
19:43 | RUN | Camilla, Neil | Y Arm | N | Improve and/or maintain health | 19:43 |
19:56 | PCAL | Francisco | PCAL | N | Preparing for lab upgrade steps | 19:58 |
22:12 | PCAL | Francisco, Miriam | PCAL Lab | Local | Preparing for lab upgrade steps | 22:40 |
22:41 | SAF | LVEA | LVEA | YES | LVEA IS LASER HAZARD | 15:52 |
22:42 | WALK | Francisco, Miriam | Overpass | N | Walking | 23:02 |
TITLE: 06/14 Eve Shift: 2300-0800 UTC (1600-0100 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 5mph Gusts, 3mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.10 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
Detector Observing and has been locked for over 4 hours. Range isn't great, around 148 MPc, but besides that everything is good.
Today Dripta and I went to EY and did what would have previously call a standard ES measurement with PS4.
And We also employed the new End Station procedure.
Details and analysis ccoming in a comment to this alog.
A PCAL ENDY Station Measurement was done on May, the PCAL team (Dripta B. & Tony S.) went to ENDY with Working Standard Hanford aka WSH(PS4) and took two End station measurements to verify that the results were consistent with each other. One with our previous version of T1500062-V16 procedure and another with T1500062-V17.
The ENDY Station Measurements was carried out mostly according to the procedures outlined in Document LIGO-T1500062-v16 & v17, Pcal End Station Power Sensor Responsivity Ratio Measurements: Procedures and Log.
Measurement Log
First thing we did was take a picture of the beam spot before anything is touched!
Martel:
Martel Voltage source applies voltage into the PCAL Chassis's Input 1 channel. We record the GPStimes that a -4.000V, -2.000V and a 0.000V voltage was applied to the Channel. This can be seen in Martel_Voltage_Test.png . We also did a measurement of the Martel's voltages in the PCAL lab to calculate the ADC conversion factor, which is included on the above document.
Plots while the Working Standard(PS4) is in the Transmitter Module during Inner beam being blocked, then the outer beam being block, followed by the background measurment: WS_at_TX.png.
The Inner, outer, and background measurement while WS in the Receiver Module: WS_at_RX.png.
The Inner, outer, and background measurement while RX Sphere is in the RX enclosure, which is our nominal set up without the WS in the beam path at all.: TX_RX.png.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The New Document has a different order of measurements that are taken and are taken in a different way.
We placed the Working Standard (PS4) in the path of the INNER Beam at the TX module.
Then the Working Standard (PS4) in the path of the OUTER Beam at the TX module.
A background measurement.
Then we take the Working Standard and put it in the RX module to get the INNER Beam.
Then the OUTTER Beam in the RX Module.
And a Background.
This is where things get different....
We remove the beam block and give the Working Standard Both Inner and Outer Beams at the SAME TIME while it's at the RX module.
We also put the RX sphere back to the RX module and put both beams on it at the same time. Like nominal opperation when the PCAL lines are turned off.
Then we take a background.
This was repeated ~10 mins later because we wanted to see if there is any time dependent variations.
The last picture is of the Beam spots after we had finished the measurement.
Old procedure measurement results : "rhoR_prime": 10565.2
New Procedure Measurement: rhoR_prime : 10571.1. This 5 hop difference is well within our uncertainty .
second New Procedure rhoR_prime 10574.3, was off by less than 3hops ,well within uncertainty.
Preliminary analysis suggests that discrepancy in rhoRprime calculated via two methods is allowed within the uncertainty.
All of this data and Analysis has been commited to the SVN or GIT:
https://svn.ligo.caltech.edu/svn/aligocalibration/trunk/Projects/PhotonCalibrator/measurements/LHO_ENDY/
Obligitory BackFront PS4/PS5 Responsivity Ratio:
PCAL Lab Responsivity Ratio Measurement:
A WSH/GS (PS4/PS5)BF Responsivity Ratio measurement was ran, analyzed, and pushed to the SVN.
PS4PS5_alphatrends.pdf to show that the recent changes to the lab have not impacted the Lab measurements
This adventure has been brought to you by Dripta B. & Tony S.
In the observing stretch that started Monday around 8 pm, there was a drop in optical gain (by 4%), and power at AS port PDs (4% drop in AS_A sum, AS_B sum, AS_C sum, and OMC REFL). There not at that time any change in circulating power in the arms, PRG, coupled cavity pole, or alignment of suspensions (shown are SR2, SRM, OM1+2, but we have also looked at many other suspension, ISI and HEPI related channels for this time 77382 ). This time is shown by the first vertical cursor in the attachment.
We were unable to relock the interferometer after that Monday evening lock (a new lockloss type appeared early Tuesday morning, 77359), and after the maintence window we were uable to lock with difficulties powering up (77363) and an AS camera imagine that had lobes whenever the beam was well centered on AS_C. We locked that evening by adding large offsets to AS_C's set point, (77368). This is the cause of the large alignment shifts seen in the screenshot on Tuesday evening to Wed morning, which allowed us to lock the IFO but created a large scatter shelf and resulted in a lower coupled cavity pole, and lower optical gain, and we did not have much squeezing that night.
We do not think that Tuesday maintence activities are the cause of our problems, although some of the Tuesday work has been reverted (77350 77369).
Yesterday we spent much of the day with SRY locked, single bounce or using the squeezer beam reflected off SRM to investigate our AS port alignment. 77392, We are able to recover the same throughput of a single bounce beam to HAM6 by moving the alignment of SR2 + SR3 by a huge amount 77388, which also produced a round looking beam on the AS camera. We haven't since tried to explore this aperture, to see if we could have also recovered this thoughput with a pitch move, for example. We also saw that the squeezer beam does not arrive in HAM6 with a good transmission when injected with the alignment used previously, but that we could recover good transmission to HAM6 by moving ZM5 by 150-200 urad, in pitch or yaw. With this shift in SRC axis, and squeezer alignment we were able to relock and not have the large scattering issues we had Tuesday night.
Today's time was spent recovering from a seemingly unrelated problem in the SQZ racks, and some commissoning aimed at recovering our previous (165Mpc) sensitivity with this new alignment. This will continue during tomorow's commissoning time.
additional related information:
Adding some trends, which have otherwise been mentioned. The optiocal levers and top mass osems suggest that there hasn't been any shift in the PRC, Michelson, or arms. There was also not a shift in alignment of the SRC in the first low optical gain lock on the 22nd, that alignment didn't shift until the manual move of the SRC in the recovery effort.
Camilla notes that the OFI temperature controler had unusual behavoir in the Tuesday relocking attempts: 78399
comparisons of single bounce throughputs: 77441