H1 is still locked, currently at 44.5 hours. All systems appear stable, though primary microseism is currently on the rise - cause of it is unknown.

Thu Jan 04 10:07:02 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 6min 58secs

Gerardo confirmed a good fill.

FAMIS 25972

BSC high freq noise is elevated for these sensor(s)!!!
    
ITMX_ST2_CPSINF_H1    
ITMX_ST2_CPSINF_V1

The Primary Microseism is currently elevated in a strange way, which may explain a slight increase in the noise Spectra across all chambers. But other than that I did not see anything that looked wildly different from the last ISI CPS Noise Spectra Check referenced in alog 75088.

TITLE: 01/04 Day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 157Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 5mph Gusts, 3mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.11 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.36 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

- H1 just hit a 40 hour lock and appears stable

- CDS/DMs ok

- EQ band looks to be slowly on the rise but still within a region in which we can operate

TITLE: 01/04 Eve Shift: 00:00-08:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 156Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Nice shift with H1 locked for 32hrs and H1/L1 double coincident the entire shift.  Warnings of earthquakes, but nothing noticeable in the control room.  Winds slowly tapered down as the shift went on and all else is well.

TITLE: 01/04 Eve Shift: 00:00-08:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 161Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Austin
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 5mph Gusts, 4mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.04 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.58 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

H1's just passed the 24hr lock mark w/ a range centered at 160Mpc.  We are running without our pair of large central TV monitors (staging to be replaced)!  Note of no commissioning until Friday.

Smooth running shift with no issues to report and H1 rocking steady slightly above 160Mpc & 28hrs of lock!

Ibrahim, Oli, Betsy, Arnaud, Fil

Context: In December ('23) We were having issues confirming that the damping, OSEMs, electronics and model were working (or rather, which wasn't working).

I have more thorough details elsewhere but in short:

• There was initial weirdness in setting offsets and exciting the different degrees of freedom
• Fil and I checked that all OSEMs were healthy by driving excitations to each one at the coil driver level (ensuring that the test stand was working)
• Arnaud was invoked to help with TFs for the BBSS (we couldn't get these to work prior)
• There was a lot more "fixing" and confirming involving excitations, damping, input filters, OSEMs, OLV setting, test stand electronics, and even getting into X1. I have notes on all this elsewhere but this is not the scope of this alog.

Eventually, we were able to go through Jeff and Oli's alog 74142. Here is what was found:

All "crude push around offsets" in the test bank yielded positive drives in the damp channels. These are the ndscope screenshots. Different offsets were needed to make the offset change more apparent in the motion (such as with L). A minimum of 1,000 was arbitrarily chosen and was usually enough.

Transfer Functions: where it gets interesting... (DTT Screenshots)

In these DTTs, each reference (black) are the transfer functions without the damping, while the red traces are with the damping.

All "translation" degrees of freedom (L, V, T) showed correct damping, peak location and resonance

All "rotation" degrees of freedom (P, R, Y) showed completely incorrect damping, usually showing shifted peaks to the right (higher freq).

In trying to figure out why this is, we asked:

• Could it be any culprit OSEMs? If so, then the damping would not have shown as cleanly for L, which uses the same 3 OSEMs (F1, F2, F3) as P.
• Could it be the electronics? Fil and I checked the coil drivers and confirmed through exciting a sine wave that this is unlikely the case. This will be re-confirmed with the new transfer function findings.
  • A small idea could indicate satellite box configurations could be misbehaving but again, the satellite boxes which serve certain OSEMs show both working and erroneous behavior.
    • E.G. RT and LF show good matching peaks and damping in Vertical but not in Roll, despite both being hooked up to the same electronics throughout.
• Could it be the OSEM polarities? These were confirmed to be correct.
  • Plus, if so, then we would see more differences with the OSEM offset scopes taken above perhaps?
    • E.G. Coil output for SD with positive offset was still positive despite a -1G polarity correction, indicating that the math is right here. Using SD as an example because it's only used in T.
  • Could it be that multiple polarities are wrong at the same time in such a was as to distort the results in this Translation vs. Rotation way?
    • E.G. LF and RT are set with opposing polarities so the output gains have 1G and -1G respectively. Since V works, but not Roll, I think that this rules out polarity issues?
  • Will reconfirm polarities time permitting.
• Could it be the model? Some BP filters? I do not know. There have been, as said, a whole host of details left out leading into this transfer function reading, so a thorough troubleshooting, re-testing would need to happen to confirm - the only untouched things are:
  • The DTT Template used
  • The BS Model provided by Jeff and Oli in alog 74142.
    • Confirmed that the matrices in EUL2OSEM are set correctly as far as sign notations and OSEM to DoF combos. Sums are net 0 for rotations and are net positive/negative for translations (which seems intuitive).

(In)conclusion:

It seems that whenever the OSEMs push in the same direction, everything goes as planned, hence why all translation damping works. When we ask the OSEMs to push in opposing directions with respect to one another though, they seem to freak out. This seems to be the prime "discovery" of finally getting the transfer functions.

This is the "for now" update - will keep trying to find out why until expertise becomes available.

TITLE: 01/03 Day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 155Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY:

- Commissioning period took place from 20:00 - 23:00 UTC

• Main items done were: calibration suite + simulines, SQZ angle tuning/testing, and a DARM calibration measurement

- EX saturation @ 22:58

- 15:02 - Temperature alert for the chillers at MX

• Trending the channel shows that the temperatures has dropped ~2 deg f over the past 16 hours - Tagging FMCS

LOG:

One of the things we had on our to-do list with the cold OM2 was to check if there was a different OMC alignment that would improve our optical gain.  I moved the OMC QPD offsets around a bit, and I can certainly make the optical gain worse.  I think I found a place where we've got about 0.5% more optical gain (kappa_c went from 1.010 to 1.015-ish), so I've accepted those QPD offsets in both our Observe and safe.snap files (see the observe.snap screenshot attached).

The second attachment shows that, while I didn't raster, I went both directions with pit and yaw on both the A and B QPDs, and there weren't any dramatically better places.  The one peak where the optical gain poked up as high as 1.018 seems to just be a fluctuation.  We've been sitting in the same alignment (according to both the QPD offsets as well as the OM3 and OMC OSEMs), and haven't seen that again. Despite the flucutations, our average seems to consistenly now be above where it was before today's commissioning period began.

WP11598 Upgrade HWS computer hardware

Jonathan, Erik, TJ, Camilla, Dave:

Yesterday Jonathan and Erik replaced the original h1hwsmsr computer with a spare V1 computer. They moved the bootdisk and the /data RAID disks over to the new computer, and restored the /data NFS file system for the ITMY HWS code (h1hwsmsr1). At the time the new computer was not connecting to the ITMX HWS camera.

This morning Camilla worked on initialized the camera connection and we were at that time able to control and see images from the camera.

This afternoon at 1pm during the commissioning period we stopped the temporary HWS ITMX IOC on cdsioc0 and Camilla started the actual HWS ITMX code on h1hwsmsr. We verified that the code is running correctly, images are being taken, settings were restored from SDF.

During the few minutes between stopping the dummy IOC and starting the actual IOC both the EDC and h1tcshwssdf SDF had disconnected channels, which then reconnected over the subsequent minutes after channel restoration.

As Naoki did in 75023, with SQZ_ANG_ADJUST in DOWN, I adjusted OPO temperature and H1:SQZ-ADF_OMC_TRANS_PHASE to improve SQZ in the yellow BLRMs (350Hz region). Our SQZ angle has changed from 167 to 180degrees. Since I did this the servo moved the angle away from and back towards this optimum 180degrees, will continue to watch.

TITLE: 01/03 Eve Shift: 00:00-08:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 152Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Austin
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 6mph Gusts, 4mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.46 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Austin handed off an H1 nearly at NLN.  I eventually took H1 to Observe, at 0011utc, but at 0037, have been getting bumped out of OBSEVERING due to a gain change (i.e. H1:CAL-INJ_CW_GAIN) for CALINJ SDF.

Attached is the last 20+ min of these gain changes from 1.0 to 0.0 every ~1min.  Have Louis on the phone now.

After the glitches last night, I went to HAM3 to do the usual fixes. I powered off the corner 2 CPS, unplugged the boards in the satellite chassis at the chamber, put it all back together and powered everything back on. The CPS haven't glitched since then, so seems like maybe things are fine now. 

At 23:37 Sun 31 Dec 2023 PST the h1hwsmsr computer crashed. At this time: EDC disconnect count went to 88, Slow Controls SDF (h1tcshwssdf) discon_chans count = 15, GRD DIAG_MAIN cannot connect to HWS channel

The main impact on the IFO is that the ITMX HWS camera cannot be controlled and is stuck in the ON state (taking images at 7Hz).

Time line for camera control:

STATE of H1: Observing at 154Mpc
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 8mph Gusts, 5mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.04 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.94 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

InLock Sus charge measurements likely caused the lockloss this morning. Though there was a PI message at the same time. but the PI didn't seem high enough to break a lock.
https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~lockloss/index.cgi?event=1387641172

Relocking  started before 1600UTC.
16:45 UTC NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE reached and OBSERVING at 16:51 UTC

SQZ manager dropped us into commissioning at 17:22 UTC
Back to Observing at 17:24 UTC

N2 truck arrived at Y end around 17:34.
I missed the time that the N2 truck left. I believe it was shortly after 1900 UTC

The Temps in the in the VPW ranged from 66F to 73F. Im not sure what the correct range should be, but the one that read 73 was nearest the warmed server exhaust on that side of the room.