Displaying reports 12241-12260 of 86532.Go to page Start 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 End
Reports until 08:00, Tuesday 19 March 2024
H1 General
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:00, Tuesday 19 March 2024 (76515)
Ops Day Shift Start

TITLE: 03/19 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Commissioning
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 4mph Gusts, 2mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.19 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Maintenance today! Looks like we were up for a good number of hours overnight.

H1 CDS
erik.vonreis@LIGO.ORG - posted 06:22, Tuesday 19 March 2024 (76514)
Workstations updated

Workstations were updated and rebooted.  Os packages were updated.  Conda package 'gwinc' was updated to 0.6.0.

LHO General
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - posted 00:05, Tuesday 19 March 2024 (76498)
Mon EVE Ops Summary

TITLE: 03/18 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Commissioning
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Shift started with Squeezer work with H1 in NLN.

Then there was work on PSAMs differential adjustments.  Then there was work on PR3 alignment 

For locking, we definitely appear to need to run Initial Alignment after locklosses.  
And LOWNOISE ASC was stuck in a loop for about 20-30min before I noticed it.  (see below)
LOG:

H1 SQZ (SQZ)
nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - posted 23:52, Monday 18 March 2024 - last comment - 15:18, Wednesday 20 March 2024(76511)
Back to 5 dB of squeezing!

Naoki, Camilla, Evan, Sheila, Julian, Nutsinee

Many things happened with the squeezer this afternoon. A quick summary is we are back to 5 dB at kHz and we should be able to do this repeatedly. No PSAMs adjustment required at this time.

- When the IFO relocked this afternoon we adjusted ZM5 alignment to optimize ADF trans signal. By doing so we improved both the RF3 and the 42. However this made squeezing worse.

- We adjusted the SQZ angle. We couldn't make it better so we went the other way. This made squeezing worse and ADS TRANS went up with it. Note that this is the IQSUM channel. We didn't think that was a sensible behavior but we've seen it before.

- Sheila and Julian then optimized the crystal tempeature. The NLG for today was 17.3.

- Naoki measured the SQZ IFO sensing matrix. We found a big cross coupling between ZM5 P to AS42 B Y. Other than then everything else was sensible. A new improved sensing matrix has been implemented. 

- We lost hours tracking down why the filter cavity failed to lock on green. A reminder to check SDF next time we run into mysterious problems.

- After everything went back to normal we recovered 5 dB of squeezing. DARM plot said so. BLRMS seemed slightly off. We tried turning the ASC loop off and optimizing the ZM alignment by hand to see if we could do any better than the loop. We couldn't. SQZ IFO ASC loop now works as it should.

- We also optimized the filter cavity offset. Mostly to double checked that we were sitting at a good place. An offset of -28 (where we started) gave the best squeezing at low frequency.

 

We haven't got to increase CLF power today. 

After a new CLF VCO installed we should revert the CLF sign to make sure everything was the same as before. In theory this shouldn't do anything. 

 

 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - 00:35, Tuesday 19 March 2024 (76513)
Link

Naoki Nutsinee

We changed "fcgs_trans_lock_threshold" to 120 today so FC wouldn't lock on higher order mode. The filter cavity was having trouble getting pass GR VCO lock so we have now reduced this power back to 80.

camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 15:18, Wednesday 20 March 2024 (76557)
Link

Accepted the new ASC_INMATRIX settings in sdf, see attached. Aslo accepted ASC_POS_Y's new minus sign and AS_A_RF42_YAW_OFFSET.

Accpeted the SQZ_ASC WFS as OFF. As decided, we will start the ER with SQZ ASC IFO off.

Images attached to this comment
H1 SQZ
gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - posted 20:40, Monday 18 March 2024 - last comment - 22:14, Monday 18 March 2024(76507)
Testing different PSAMS values

Jennie, Naoki, Evan, Gabriele

WE stepped the two PSAMS differentially, to find a better position. There is some evidence that a value of 150 / 90 is better than the original 120 / 120. Noise i a 200-250 Hz region is about 4% lower. More details will follow.

We tried a small common step after the differential tuning, but saw little effect

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - 22:14, Monday 18 March 2024 (76508)
Link

ZM4 ZM5 θSQZ BLRMS, 200–250 Hz (m) BLRMS, 430–490 Hz (m)
120 120 205.2° 1.124×10−19 1.099×10−19
140 100 195.7° 1.096×10−19 1.045×10−19
150 90 200.5° 1.105×10−19 1.051×10−19
160 80 200.5° 1.080×10−19 1.044×10−19
180 60 200.5° 1.122×10−19 1.078×10−19
200 40 200.5° 1.141×10−19 1.100×10−19
170 110 200.5° 1.104×10−19 1.050×10−19

Naoki was optimizing the squeeze angle by hand. The BLRMS are possibly confounded by some 0.03–0.1 Hz motion from an earthquake, but in any case there doesn't seem to be a major win here.

H1 ISC
gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - posted 19:58, Monday 18 March 2024 - last comment - 22:19, Monday 18 March 2024(76506)
SRCL detuning has no effect on bucket noise

Jennie, Naoki, Evan, Gabriele

We changed the SRCL offset between -250 and 0 counts, and optimizd the squeezing angle at each value. We see an effect at high frequency (worsening when the offset is different than the nominal -175) but not noticeable change in the bucket.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
evan.hall@LIGO.ORG - 22:19, Monday 18 March 2024 (76509)
Link

SRCL offset (ct) PCAL (m) BLRMS, 430–490 Hz (m) Ratio (m/m)
−250 1.182×10−18 1.114×10−19 10.61
−175 1.185×10−18 1.101×10−19 10.76
−100 1.180×10−18 1.107×10−19 10.66
0 1.177×10−18 1.101×10−19 10.69

No clear win here.

H1 DetChar
gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - posted 19:13, Monday 18 March 2024 (76505)
Peaks in DARM between 20 and 40 Hz

The bump of noise in DARM around 30 Hz is mostly a forest of peaks. One of them (33.43 Hz) is actually a calibration line. For the others, I looked at coherence with corner suspension optical levers and witness sensors. Some of the peaks shos enough coherence to indicate that maybe the peak is due to motion of that suspension

Frequency Suspension
25.19   
26.53   BS / PR3
27.04   BS / PR3 / SR3
27.42  
27.50   
27.72   
28.22   
29.50   PR3 / SR3
29.97   PR3
32.31   
33.33   
33.43   
35.22   PR2
35.71   
39.80   PR3 SR3

Here's a full table of coherence

  25.19 26.53 27.04 27.42 27.50 27.72 28.22 29.50 29.97 32.31 33.33 33.43 35.22 35.71 39.80
H1:SUS-BS_M3_OPLEV_PIT_OUT_DQ 0.019 0.231 0.290 0.008 0.009 0.001 0.003 0.164 0.003 0.028 0.008 0.039 0.123 0.020 0.024
H1:SUS-BS_M3_OPLEV_YAW_OUT_DQ 0.004 0.201 0.304 0.007 0.003 0.003 0.040 0.138 0.022 0.018 0.008 0.012 0.182 0.047 0.118
H1:SUS-PRM_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.003 0.013 0.020 0.003 0.024 0.001 0.013 0.121 0.042 0.005 0.001 0.001 0.040 0.107 0.001
H1:SUS-PRM_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.003 0.017 0.002 0.008 0.014 0.021 0.049 0.001 0.008 0.016 0.033 0.021 0.009 0.007 0.006
H1:SUS-PR2_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.001 0.002 0.032 0.002 0.021 0.031 0.023 0.013 0.041 0.023 0.013 0.011 0.010 0.013 0.043
H1:SUS-PR2_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.004 0.014 0.054 0.006 0.035 0.023 0.005 0.045 0.074 0.002 0.005 0.004 0.020 0.093 0.005
H1:SUS-PR3_M3_OPLEV_PIT_OUT_DQ 0.023 0.257 0.297 0.003 0.033 0.007 0.005 0.166 0.017 0.031 0.001 0.004 0.188 0.007 0.165
H1:SUS-PR3_M3_OPLEV_YAW_OUT_DQ 0.002 0.258 0.297 0.003 0.059 0.005 0.002 0.163 0.005 0.016 0.004 0.002 0.171 0.038 0.109
H1:SUS-PR3_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.026 0.051 0.005 0.022 0.017 0.035 0.025 0.065 0.365 0.005 0.001 0.028 0.070 0.039 0.021
H1:SUS-PR3_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.064 0.072 0.030 0.000 0.020 0.001 0.000 0.052 0.772 0.036 0.079 0.042 0.001 0.353 0.005
H1:SUS-SRM_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.028 0.049 0.034 0.002 0.001 0.008 0.024 0.049 0.006 0.009 0.011 0.028 0.016 0.001 0.034
H1:SUS-SRM_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.006 0.029 0.015 0.059 0.011 0.020 0.022 0.015 0.006 0.029 0.046 0.007 0.003 0.001 0.020
H1:SUS-SR2_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.004 0.002 0.008 0.006 0.014 0.005 0.054 0.013 0.540 0.008 0.001 0.014 0.012 0.121 0.008
H1:SUS-SR2_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.013 0.008 0.039 0.029 0.028 0.010 0.010 0.003 0.521 0.004 0.008 0.003 0.068 0.153 0.008
H1:SUS-SR3_M3_OPLEV_PIT_OUT_DQ 0.014 0.165 0.287 0.006 0.030 0.001 0.001 0.169 0.012 0.009 0.012 0.012 0.145 0.008 0.079
H1:SUS-SR3_M3_OPLEV_YAW_OUT_DQ 0.029 0.133 0.290 0.007 0.040 0.003 0.001 0.173 0.013 0.010 0.008 0.005 0.020 0.006 0.175
H1:SUS-SR3_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.007 0.002 0.002 0.013 0.011 0.017 0.015 0.046 0.005 0.026 0.007 0.028 0.008 0.068 0.011
H1:SUS-SR3_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.092 0.005 0.023 0.014 0.000 0.010 0.021 0.022 0.003 0.000 0.007 0.009 0.008 0.013 0.022
H1:SUS-MC1_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.031 0.032 0.016 0.005 0.012 0.025 0.003 0.020 0.658 0.003 0.006 0.001 0.042 0.125 0.015
H1:SUS-MC1_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.004 0.000 0.009 0.013 0.014 0.004 0.057 0.111 0.124 0.017 0.020 0.012 0.047 0.034 0.041
H1:SUS-MC2_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.012 0.044 0.016 0.005 0.004 0.016 0.011 0.008 0.061 0.002 0.015 0.028 0.039 0.005 0.036
H1:SUS-MC2_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.005 0.009 0.003 0.006 0.024 0.012 0.002 0.012 0.082 0.032 0.058 0.034 0.037 0.029 0.041
H1:SUS-MC3_M3_WIT_P_DQ 0.010 0.014 0.039 0.015 0.025 0.043 0.032 0.008 0.015 0.003 0.003 0.009 0.008 0.018 0.003
H1:SUS-MC3_M3_WIT_Y_DQ 0.003 0.047 0.044 0.009 0.043 0.024 0.004 0.095 0.006 0.049 0.004 0.027 0.015 0.008 0.001
Images attached to this report
H1 SQZ
naoki.aritomi@LIGO.ORG - posted 18:12, Monday 18 March 2024 - last comment - 14:15, Tuesday 26 March 2024(76503)
Old FC2 M1 offload filter in INIT state of SQZ_FC guardian

Evan, Naoki, Nutsinee, Camilla

Today Sheila added nodes.set_managed() in INIT state of SQZ_FC guardian and let SQZ_FC guardian go through the INIT state. However, the FC2 M1 offload filter in the INIT state was old filter setting in 68914, which caused GR_SUS_LOCKING failure. We reverted it as shown in the attachment and updated the FC2 M1 offload filter in INIT state.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
nutsinee.kijbunchoo@LIGO.ORG - 23:21, Monday 18 March 2024 (76510)
Link

Attached a screen shot of the old (wrong) settings on top, correct one at the bottom.

Images attached to this comment
naoki.aritomi@LIGO.ORG - 14:15, Tuesday 26 March 2024 (76722)
Link

In 76503, the limiter for FC2 M1 was not in INIT state of SQZ_FC guardian, but we added the limiter.

Images attached to this comment
H1 ISC (DetChar, ISC)
gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:17, Monday 18 March 2024 (76501)
Updated comparison O4a and now

This is an update of the plot in 76372: the high frequency (above 2 kHz) now lines up with the O4a level, but the noise between 40 and 1000 Hz is still larger now than in O4a, although a bit better than a week ago.

The first plot is done with GDS-CALIB_CLEAN: the jitter subtraction is still doing a decent job, even though it was tuned for O4a.

The second plot is done with GDS-CALIB_NOLINES, and shows the jitter peaks in all cases. There is still the same difference between now and then. So jitter is not enough to explain the lowest range we have now.

Images attached to this report
H1 ISC (SQZ)
jennifer.wright@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:17, Monday 18 March 2024 - last comment - 13:40, Thursday 21 March 2024(76500)
Updated ASC-A_DC_YAW_OFFSET

Updated ASC-AS_A_DC_YAW_OFFSET to be -0.15 instead of OFF at 00:09:36 UTC as even though this change has now been put in the guardian we have not lost lock since this was done by Sheila and so the offset was still off. I checked with the squeezers first.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
louis.dartez@LIGO.ORG - 17:27, Monday 18 March 2024 (76502)
Link 

just noting for our future selves: Sheila updated the guardian in LHO:76488.
jennifer.wright@LIGO.ORG - 19:16, Monday 18 March 2024 (76504)
Link

Ibrahim, Jennie W

I analysed the DARM offset step test that Ibrahim ran over the weekend. The contrast defect is now 1.149mW.

See the attached plot for DCPD sum level and circulating power level during the test. DCPD_SUM_OUT is nominally at 40mA before and after the test.  The first attached plot uses the height of two calibration lines on the DCPD and in DARM to track how the DARM optical gain changes with differing power on DCPD sum. The second shows the scaling of DARM optical gain with DARM offset. From this we can see the DARM offset true zero is when the applied offset in OMC-READOUT_X0_OFFSET is 0.608 counts.

Images attached to this comment
Non-image files attached to this comment
H1 ISC (ISC)
jennifer.wright@LIGO.ORG - posted 17:03, Monday 18 March 2024 (76499)
Circulating powers and DARM offset level look similar to 04a

I trended the DARM offset (via checking the fringe offset OMC-READOUT_X0_OFFSET) and the circulating powers in 04 a on Jan 14th and on March 16th post-vent.

The offset and circulating powers have not changed appreciably. The first image is 04a and the second this past Saturday. In both cases the contrast defect was set to give 40mA on DCPD_SUM. The Y cirulating power went up by 2.5W and the X by 2W.

The fringe offset went up by 8.8e-4 counts in that time.

 

Images attached to this report
H1 ISC
sheila.dwyer@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:38, Monday 18 March 2024 - last comment - 00:09, Tuesday 19 March 2024(76488)
Added AS_A yaw offset to guardian

I edited ISC_LOCK LOWNOISE_ASC state to engage the -0.15 offset in AS_A_YAW_DC that was found 76407, I have just loaded it now so it should happen the next time we lock the IFO.

Comments related to this report
louis.dartez@LIGO.ORG - 00:09, Tuesday 19 March 2024 (76512)
Link 

I added a missing counter increment. Corey found that we got stuck here for 20minutes Monday night.

svn revision: 27257
H1 ISC
gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - posted 21:17, Thursday 14 March 2024 - last comment - 16:15, Monday 18 March 2024(76407)
AS_A WFS centering affects the DHARD_Y to DARM coupling

[Louis, Gabriele]

The DHARD_Y to DARM coupling always showed two regimes: a steep coupling below 20-30 Hz, and a flatter coupling above 20-30 Hz. We've been able to change the flatter coupling above 20-30 Hz by changing the ITMT Y2L coefficient.

Today we confirmed a suspicion: the steep low frequency coupling is due to length to angle coupling at the AS WFS. We changed the beam position on the WFS by adding an offset to the WFS centering (H1:ASC-AS_A_DC_YAW_OFFSET) and saw a change in the DHARD_Y to DARM coupling.

A value close to -0.14 gives the minimum coupling below 20 Hz. we now have two independent knobs to minimize the DHARD_Y to DARM coupling at all frequencies.

Incidentally, the higher frequency couping is now lower than yesterday, with the same ITMY Y2L coefficient of -1.65

We did a scan of the AS_A_WFS Y centering from -0.2 to -0.1 in steps of 0.01, an analysis will follow tomorrow:

-0.200: 1394510627 - 1394510727
-0.190: 1394510777 - 1394510877
-0.180: 1394510927 - 1394511027
-0.170: 1394511077 - 1394511177
-0.160: 1394511227 - 1394511327
-0.150: 1394511377 - 1394511477
-0.140: 1394511527 - 1394511627
-0.130: 1394511677 - 1394511777
-0.120: 1394511827 - 1394511928
-0.110: 1394511978 - 1394512078
-0.100: 1394512128 - 1394512228
 0.000: 1394512278 - 1394512378

We are leaving a value of -0.14 in the WFS offset

 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
louis.dartez@LIGO.ORG - 21:57, Thursday 14 March 2024 (76408)
Link 

Attached is a comparison of the DARM sensing function with no AS A centering offset vs an offset of -0.14. 

With an AS A centering offset of -0.14, which we found to be the value that results in the minimum amount of coupling to DARM below 20Hz, the sensing function clearly shows optical spring-like characteristics. This brings to mind a few thoughts: 

1. This supports the idea that coupling from the DHARD loop into DARM has a noticeable effect on the structure seen in the sensing function at low frequencies. We've been wondering about this for some time, so it's nice to finally have a direction to point in.
2. We tend to adjust the src detuning by constantly measuring the sensing function and trying to find an SRC offset that results in a flat sensing function at low frequencies. The fact that DHARD also couples with DARM in such a way that it can affect the shape of the sensing function at low frequencies begs the question: could we be in fact further detuning the src while intending to do the opposite due to confusion caused by the dhard coupling effects?
3. I recall being told that sometimes squeezing gets better with some level of detuning. If our only measure of SRC detuning is from measuring and inspecting the sensing function then this measurement hasn't been clean due to the DHARD coupling. 


lots to think about..
Images attached to this comment
gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - 10:46, Friday 15 March 2024 (76419)
Link

Here's a more detailed analysis of the AS WFC centering steps.

The first plot shows the steps in ASC-AS_A_DC_YAW_OFFSET compared with a DARM spectrogram, during a DHARD_Y injection. The spectrogram shows that there is minimum in the coupling of DHARD_Y to DARM around -0.15 / =0.16.

The second plot shows the transfer function from DHARD_Y to DARM for all values of the offset. A value of -0.15 gives the lowest coherence and the lowest coupling, so that seems to be the optimal value. One can notice how the transfer function phase flips sign as expected when one goes through the minimum coupling.

Images attached to this comment
gabriele.vajente@LIGO.ORG - 11:50, Friday 15 March 2024 (76422)
Link

Changing the AS_A centering offset also moved SR2, SRM and BS.

elenna.capote@LIGO.ORG - 21:38, Friday 15 March 2024 (76451)
Link

I tried stepping the REFl WFS A and B DC offsets in yaw similarly to see if the CHARD Y coupling to DARM would change. In summary, I stepped between -0.2 and 0.2 for both WFS and saw no change.

Method: I set a 30 second ramp on the offsets because the DC centering loops are slow. I stepped first in steps of 0.01, and then 0.02. I injected a broadband CHARD Y injection and measured the transfer function to darm between 10-30 Hz. I saw no change in the coupling while I made these steps.

minhyo.kim@LIGO.ORG - 14:52, Monday 18 March 2024 (76489)
Link

Before checking on the calibration change in DARM and DHARD, I check on the thermalisation effect with the coupling.
I chose long duration locking time (Mar. 16, 05:30:00 UTC ~ 15:30:00 UTC) without centering offset, and selected start, middle (10:30:00 UTC) and end time within the time window.

Three plots are; 1) DARM, 2) DHARD PIT, 3) DHARD YAW.
In addition, I included screenshot of ndscope to confirm the time window.

As the 'end' time data in all plots show different trend compare to the other times, it seems that the thermalisation affects DARM and DHARD.

Images attached to this comment
minhyo.kim@LIGO.ORG - 16:15, Monday 18 March 2024 (76490)
Link

Checked on the calibration lines in DARM and DHARD with centering offset on/off conditions.
To minimize the thermalisation effect, time for the comparison were chosen within short time window.

Figures are; 1) Comparison altogether, 2) DARM comparison, 3) DHARD PIT, 4) DHARD YAW, 5) Screenshot of the ndscope around comparison time.

It can be confirmed that the peaks of calibration lines were same in DARM with and without the centering offset. However, for DHARD, only YAW showed calibration lines, and with different peak magnitude (lower in without offset).

Images attached to this comment
H1 DAQ
daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:18, Wednesday 07 February 2024 - last comment - 21:53, Tuesday 17 December 2024(75761)
Previous/spare timing master

The previous timing master which was again running out of range on the voltage to the OCXO, see alogs 68000 and  61988, has been retuned using the mechanical adjustment of the OCXO.

Today's readback voltage is at +3.88V. We will keep it running over the next few months to see, if it eventually settles.

Comments related to this report
daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - 10:33, Wednesday 21 February 2024 (75912)
Link

Today's readback voltage is at +3.55V.

daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - 16:18, Monday 18 March 2024 (76497)
Link

Today's readback voltage is at +3.116V.

daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - 15:25, Tuesday 07 May 2024 (77697)
Link

Today's readback voltage is at +1.857V.

daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - 15:54, Monday 15 July 2024 (79142)
Link

Today's readback voltage is at +0.951V.

daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - 21:53, Tuesday 17 December 2024 (81886)
Link

Today's readback voltage is at -2.511V

Displaying reports 12241-12260 of 86532.Go to page Start 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 End