Code located in /ligo/gitcommon/labutils/beam_spot_raster/a2l_gain_stepper.py

Current spot positions (e.g. H1:SUS-ITMX_L2_DRIVEALIGN_P2L_SPOT_GAIN):

It will step the nominal values up and down 0.4 in 0.2 steps / 15 minutes. e.g. starting a2l + [-0.2, -0.4, -0.2, 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.2, 0]

I've set up a script to run this on ETMY at 6am to 10am tomorrow (23rd) in a tmux session on cdsws26, will only run if the IFO is at NLN (>=600)  at 6am.

Ryan S will try to find times (4 hours each) to run this on the other optics ITMX and ETMX over the weekend, command below. We don't have beam spot control on ITMY so can skip that.

>> python /ligo/gitcommon/labutils/beam_spot_raster/a2l_gain_stepper.py ETMY --start 'now'

Sheila, Camilla, Naoki, remote converations with Vicky

Overnight the squeezing was not injected because of some guardian issues.   The OPO failed to lock, we will look into that separately.

After that the filter cavity did not find IR.  Looking at the logic in SQZ manager, it didn't make sense to me.  We were requesting the filter cavity to IR_FOUND without first locking the OPO or the CLF, but the filter cavity can't find IR until after both the IR and the CLF are locked.  This might have been done to save some time, but it sets up a race condition where we are relying on the filter cavity green locking to be slower than the OPO and CLF locking.  If the filter cavity failed in it's search, then it would stay in FIND_IR and not try again.   I separated the lock OPO and lock cilter cavity states, and rearranged the graph so that the filter cavity isn't requested to lock until after the CLF is requested to lock.  This will take slightly longer but not much longer, and this happens in parallel with IFO locking. We loaded this change and excerised it.

While I was looking at SQZ_MANAGER, I noticed some things that seem potentially confusing and could cause some difficulties with using it.  Several of these related to using the same states for frequency dependent and frequency independent squeezing.  The SQZ manager was looking at the state of the FC guardian to determine if FIS or FDS is desired, in many places.  I changed this so that FIS has a separate path from FDS after the CLF is locked.  This allows simplifying states like OPEN_BDIV (we now have two versions, one for FDS one for FIS).  Some states like LOCK_LO and SQZ_ASC are the same in the two paths, so I've used a generator to make sure that the same code is used in both paths.  Naoki and I checked this, going from DOWN to FDS, FDS to FIS, DOWN TO FIS, and FDS and FIS to no squeezing.  The previous version of the guardian had a path from FDS to FIS, but there was not code to do that so we've now eliminated the path. We made the changes needed to ISC_LOCK, and laoded them.

The guardian before these changes is 27284

The FC_LOCKED checker only checks that the FC gaurdian isn't in IDLE, but it seems to be used througout SQZ_MANAGER as though it was checking the filter cavity is locked.

FAMIS Link:  25983

Only CPS which looks higher at high frequencies would be ETMy Stage 1, H2 (although the terminal did not list it as "high").  (see attached plots).

FAMIS 26236

Laser Status:
    NPRO output power is 1.819W (nominal ~2W)
    AMP1 output power is 67.15W (nominal ~70W)
    AMP2 output power is 138.3W (nominal 135-140W)
    NPRO watchdog is GREEN
    AMP1 watchdog is GREEN
    AMP2 watchdog is GREEN

PMC:
    It has been locked 21 days, 21 hr 9 minutes
    Reflected power = 16.84W
    Transmitted power = 109.0W
    PowerSum = 125.9W

FSS:
    It has been locked for 0 days 11 hr and 41 min
    TPD[V] = 0.8342V

ISS:
    The diffracted power is around 2.3%
    Last saturation event was 0 days 11 hours and 41 minutes ago

Possible Issues: None reported

After the 76623 frequency noise injections, we left CARM control just on REFL B (H1:LSC-REFL_SERVO_IN1GAIN = 12dB) rather than the nominal  6dB on both REFL A and B. Kept the REFL B only config from 17:39UTC to 18:58UTC.

Plan to look for coherence between DARM and REFL A to check for frequency noise on REFL B (when REFL A is out of loop, acting only as a witness). Plot attached shows no coherence in 100Hz to 1kHz region above 0.04.

Test was maybe redundant after Francisco's 76533.

Sheila, Jennie, Camilla. Following 70642.  Intensity noise measured in 76323.

Plot of laser noise budget attached.  First conclusions: Frequency noise lower, Input Beam jitter slightly higher. Compare to O4a plot (Aug 20 data?) 74943 which is a factor of ~2 worse than Aug 10th 72140.

Jitter noise excitation gain, reduced from frequency range from10,000 to 2000, didn't mean to but reverted the templates and it doesn't matter.

Frequency_excitation.xml adjusted bandstop for dither lock from 4000-4200 to 4090-4290Hz (from 76587).

template: Frequency_excitation.xml

Adjusting  70642 for Switch CARM control from REFL A+B to REFL B only from 60W:

• REFL A and B both have 6dB digital gain with 60W
• Via sitemap > LSC > REFL Servo, step down 1dB on REFL A and up 1dB on REFL B until the REFL A gain is 0dB and REFL B gain is 12dB
• Step down REFL A gain down to -32dB 
• Turn off the input 1 switch (REFL_SERVO_IN1EN) for REFL A

Instead of bringing back CARM control to REFL A and B, from 17:39UTC we left CARM control on REFL B only  to look for some coherence.

Fri Mar 22 10:12:54 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 12min 50secs

Gerardo confirmed a good fill curbside.

Camilla, Sheila, Jennie W

After we restarted the SQZ MANAGER this morning we took the SQZ angle test to see how the squeezing changes with a thermalised IFO if we step through optimum  squeezing through tuning the ADF phase. This ran into some problems when we tried to start at 85 and 90 degrees as the loop seemed to run through a really wide range of phases (we think the loop was diverging). Camilla manually changed the ADF phase to 110 degrees and we restarted the test so it stpped up in steps of 3 degrees every 2 minutes. We changed this halfway through to have a longer time between steps for the loop to follow. The test was stopped at 161 degrees.

We stepped SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE 

GPS 1395157776  PHASE = 110

H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 113
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 116
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 119

H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 122
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 125
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 128
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 131
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 134
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 137
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 140
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 143
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 146
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 149
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 152
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 155
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 158
H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE = 161
 

Phase was put back to 130 degrees after the test at GPS 1395160576.

First image shows the SQZ BLRMS that show how squeezing gets better and worse during the test, calibrated in dBs. Then below this the CLF phase, the OMC trans phase which we are changing and the range at the bottom.

Second image attached shows the same BLRMS (in counts before and just after the test on the bottom left) and the CLF phase and OMC trans phase on the bottom right. From the blue trace just before the test you can see the sign flip when we tried to start the test at 100.

NB: we had been locked for over 6 hours when we started but squeezing wasn't injected until around 20 minutes before the test started.

TITLE: 03/22 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 4mph Gusts, 3mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.23 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: H1 has been locked at NLN for 6 hours, but it appears that there has been no SQZ (and thus, no observing) since the previous lock acquisition. Sheila and Jennie are debugging.

• Wind and microseism are low
• All other systems nominal

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:

•  
• 2256-2330 Initial alignment
• 2313 Run down X+Y arms (gabriele)
• 2329 End of SHG optics lab work (julian)
• 2330-0010 Lock#1:  Nice & straightforward lock.  For the last 45min Evan had some MICH excitations, and Naoki did some SQZ work.
  • 0010-0055 NLN, but another short lock similar to what (4) other locks during the day.  :-/
• 0156 Observing  (NLN at 0152)--Automatic Operation did NOT take H1 to Observing for some reason.
  • 0320 Lockloss with an ITMx SEI ISI Watchdog trip via the CPS'.
• 0323-0340 Lock#2:  Lockloss during PRMI after Check Mich Fringes
• 0341-0424 Lock #3:  Went directly to Check Mich Fringes and then PRMI.
• 0428-0559 OBSERVING (NLN @ 0424) via Automatic Operation (woo woo!)
• 0600-0605 Lock #4:  Lockloss at LOCKING ALS.  X-arm was harder to offload, but eventually did (with out flashes)
• 0606-0653 Lock#4:  Xarm clearly less stable than Y.  But it gets there (offloaded) within 2min this time.  Gave DRMI 3min to lock and then moved to CHECK MICH FRINGES + PRMI & then DRMI locked within 2min.  
• 0657 Back to Observing and placed in Auto Ops.

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.)

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.

[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.

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.

We tried the in-lock charge measurements but forgot about the New-DARM configuration so caused a lockloss in the SWAP_TO_ITMX state.

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?

Artem, Jennie W., Gabriele

Following up on alog 76516.

We compared DARM for following configurations:
* No squeezing O4a, 12/20/2023 18:10-18:20
* With squeezing O4a, 01/12/2024 01:35:15-01:45:15 
* No squeezing now, 03/17/2024 04:45:31-04:55:31
* With squeezing now, 03/17/2024 08:18:46-08:28:46

Specifically, following ASDs were calculated: sqrt(abs(no_sqeezing_now^2 - no_squeezing_o4a^2)), and sqrt(abs(squeezing_now^2 - squeezing_o4a^2)). These are shown as blue and red traces on the attached plot. The original DARM traces are shown in gray.

Our preliminary conclusion from this is that it appears that excess noise is ~same with and without squeezing.

We'll make this plot with longer time series and do some more tests.

Jupyter notebook is available here.