On 11/12/24 Rahul ran the OPLEV charge measurements, I processed them this afternoon...
ETMY's charge seems to be slightly trending up in UL and LL but looks stagnant in UR. The charge is >= 50 V in LL_{P,Y} and UL_Y.
ETMX's charge looks to have a small upwards trend and is >= 50 V in all DOFs and quadrantss. The charge looks to have risen ~5-10 V in a little over a month over the DOFs and quadrants. The error in the measurement for EX is also larger than we usually see, the secondary microseism was elevated during these measurements.
Today we ran a correlated noise measurement for 1 hour starting at 1416594379, meaning that the detector was locked, thermalized, and with no squeezing engaged for this period of time. We left calibration lines on during the measurement. The measurement was preceeded by a calibration measurement as well, see alog 81461.
During the measurement I ran a script that I edited from Sander Vermeulen that collects the full 524kHz OMC DCPD channels (H1:OMC-DCPD_{A,B}0_IN1) (see Jeff Kissel's comment in alog 69398 which gives a good description of how these channels are created). The data from these two channels was saved in in hdf5 files as 1 second frames. Those files can be found in /ligo/home/elenna.capote/OMC_DCPD/242511-102557/, and on the DCC at this file card: T2400394.
Sheila noted one large glitch at UTC 18:35, so this data may need to be gated around that time.
Edit: the resulting zip file is 9GB so the DCC cannot host it. I am thinking of other ways to share this data with others....
Editedit: added box link to DCC for data access.
This data has been posted to the DCC here: T2400394.
Over the weekend, we've had greatly improved stability because of the PSL swap. The IFO range has been mostly below 160Mpc, with short times near 165Mpc in the first hour of each lock.
The first attachment shows a comparison of the cleaned GDS strain sensitivity at the 165 Mpc time to later in the lock, along with coherences from the lower range time. The sensitivity earlier in the lock was broadly better from 18-55 Hz, there are coherences with both ASC and LSC that are contributing to the noise from 18-27 Hz so we spent some time trying to address those. The worse sensitivty from 27-55 Hz is not explained by these coherences, and the usual squeezing adjustments (81463 81458) don't seem to be able to help. We might think about checking both the SRC detuning and the filter cavity detuning to see if they make an impact in this region. We do seem to have slightly less high frequency squeezing than in the past.
To address the ASC coherences, I ran the A2L script that TJ put in userapps/isc/h1/scripts/a2l/a2l_min_multi.py with the command python a2l_min_multi.py --all The second attachment shows this script running, using an ndscope template that is in sheila.dwyer/ndscope/ASC/A2L_script_ADS.yaml The first time through the pitch a2l gains for ETMY, ITMY and ITMX were all set to the maximum that the script checks, so we ran it again. The third attachment shows the coherences (with no squeezing) after this A2L adjustment and Camilla's adjustment of the PRCL feedforward. In the past we've seen that after running this a2l script we can do slightly better by dong a manual adjustment based on injections into CHARD or DHARD, (79921 80250) we haven't taken the time to check that today, but the script does seem to have helped in the frequency region where it's measuring. It has made the CHARD Y coherence worse below 15 Hz, which we've seen consistently when the decoupling is good around 20-30 Hz.
The last attachment shows a comparison of the DARM sensitivty in the high range early part of the lock, the lower later sensitivity, and currently after these retunings but without squeezing. This suggests that our adjustments did a good job below 27 Hz where we the squeezing does have an impact in this frequency band where we haven't yet recovered the sensitivity.
Old A2L settings:
'FINAL':{
'P2L':{'ITMX':-1.0,
'ITMY':-0.39,
'ETMX':2.98,
'ETMY':4.72},
'Y2L':{'ITMX':3.05,
'ITMY':-2.43, #+1.0,
'ETMX':4.9,
'ETMY':1.42 }
New A2L settings:
'FINAL':{
'P2L':{'ITMX':-0.66,
'ITMY':-0.05,
'ETMX':3.12,
'ETMY':5.03},
'Y2L':{'ITMX':2.980,
'ITMY':-2.52, #+1.0,
'ETMX':4.99,
'ETMY':1.34 },
Attached updated plot. It seems that these commissioning changes made the range better 10-30Hz, maybe look 50-90Hz. No SQZ is slightly better right at 20Hz.
Also attache is range BLRMs, showing main change is 20-29Hz region.
Running the range comparison script comparing the time of the best range early this morning (11:30UTC) to a time a few hours later (16:15 UTC) and currently (20:30 UTC) using 15 minutes of data. It looks like SQZer differences and violins, since its seen in broadband high and low frequency, and I can see the ~500Hz line rising from ETMY 1 and ITMY 5/6 for the first time span. That line is reduced in the following check, after new damping settings are put in. A line at 300Hz also looks to have grown slightly.
The blue traces are the reference good range time from the beginning of the lock.
After Sheila adjusted the A2L gains we checked on MICH and PRCL coherence suing the injections inlsc/h1/scripts/feedforward/{DOF}_excitation.xml.
MICH looked fine (attached).
Did not check SRCL, as originally there looked to be no SRCL/DARM coherence (e.g. 81451). After the other changes, there is now some SRCL coherence (shown in Sheila's alog). We could we tuning this gain in a future commissioning time.
I have found new damping settings for ETMY mode01 and ITMY mode05/06, which are given below,
ETMY01
Nominal - FM1+FM6+FM10, Gain = +0.1 (+30deg phase)
New - FM1+FM8+FM10, Gain = +0.1 (+60deg phase)
ITMY 05/06
Nominal - FM5+FM6+FM7+FM10, Gain = +0.02 (-30deg phase)
New - FM5+FM6+FM8+FM10, Gain = +0.01 (+30deg phase)
I have not made any changes in the lscparam file, will check these new settings for a few lock stretches (also let microseism to settle down) before making them final.
Tagging OpsInfo
So once Rahul is happy with the new Violin Mode settings for ETMy 01 & ITMy 05/06, Operators will need to enter his NEW settings by hand (this can be done any time after the DAMP_VIOLINS_FULL_POWER [566] state. For clarity, also attaching screenshots with the filter banks in question circled in light blue:
Mon Nov 25 10:03:17 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 3min 15secs
Problematic fill; TCs started with positive temps, very fast fill, TCmins -91C,-89C. Standard plot plus one offset in time (negative TCs).
This morning we tested the SQZ_MANGER states SCAN_SQZ_ALIGNEMNT and SQZ_SQZANG, the AS42_AS_B_RF41_PIT was at -0.15 and the angle changed ~2deg. The range and squeezing didn't noticeably change so we went back to FREQ_DEP_SQZ which turns back on the SQZ ASC AS42 alignment servo and the ADF sqz angle servo as we've nominally been using them.
This morning, Commissioners wanted suite of calibration measurements run. Broadband measurement was run first with Squeezing, but after this measurment I paused to let them take H1 to No Squeezing (I believe they did this because they didn't want calibration to affect their squeezing work). Then proceeded with the "non-standard" simulines measurement---where,"non-standard" is measurement is what Louis Dartez has specifically been requesting for H1 (see below).
Measurement NOTES:
Took it to NO_SQUEEZING during calibration measurements. Reset the AS42 no-squeezing offsets, and there are very minimal changes (which is great). Accepted new "no-sqz" offsets in SDF.
TITLE: 11/25 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 154Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: TJ
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 4mph Gusts, 1mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.48 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
H1 had another 15+hr lock w/ a lockloss overnight (which is most likely due to a M4.6 earthquake 200 miles off the WA coast and NOT IMC or FSS!); TJ needed to assist H1 during his owl shift. H1 currently at just under 5hrs for current lock.
Environmentally, a slight increase in µseism to start touching the 95th percentile, otherwise quiet with no wind. Today it looks like they are pouring concrete at the new Warehouse next to the Staging Building.
Monday morning, but not sure if there is commissioning time on the docket.
SRM M3 had tripped during initial alignment, something that we've seen a few times this week. After untripping it and watching AS AIR in DOWN, I moved it in yaw ~20 urad and then it locked right up.
TITLE: 11/25 Eve Shift: 0030-0600 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: TJ
SHIFT SUMMARY:
IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 17:12 UTC 11/24 (~13 hr lock!)
Extremely quiet shift. Intentionally dropped out of OBSERVING twice:
LOG:
None
I tried to change the ADF demod phase to change the SQZ angle servo setpoint (aka: to change the sqz angle). Also tried OPO set temperature, but the original was good already. Between temperature and sqz angle, I think the kHz squeezing improved < 0.5dB, and I saw minimal difference in other SQZ BLRMS and range (see lazy summary pages trends). So the lower range this lock is likely not only the squeezer.
TITLE: 11/24 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Aligning
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY:
Brought H1 back to NLN at the beginning of the shift. Then H1 was jostled around by a CP1 Fill (and then spent the rest of the shift returning to a BNS range it had before CP1). Have been watching L1 to see if they drop out of Observing so we could have Vicky touch up the Squeezer (but they've been locked for ~40hrs).
LOG:
TITLE: 11/25 Eve Shift: 0030-0600 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 157Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 9mph Gusts, 6mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.32 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 17:10 UTC (~7 hr lock)
If L1 goes down, I was told I can drop out of OBSERVING and tune SQZ, which has been having some issues today.
This morning there was a range drop on H1 (163Mpc down to about 151Mpc, see attachment#1). Was working on trying to figure out how to run the Range Check measurements, but while chatting with Vicky on Teamspeak, she reminded me about the daily CP1 Fill can affect range (see attachment #2 which is plot from Dave's alog) ....and the effect certainly lines up! (Also see Oli's alog from Sept here.) The time in question is 1802-1812utc (1002-1012amPT). I will not share the Low-Range-Plots I took for 1810utc since CP1 Fill is most likely the culprit.
However, a note about the range is that it has not really returned to 163Mpc---it's hovered at 157Mpc post-CP1-Fill for the last 4+hrs.
So I ran another Low Range DTT for about an hour ago (2117utc/1317PT).
Attached plots show the 30 minutes around the CP1 overfill for Sunday and Saturday. The H1 range shows a correlation with the CP1 discharge line pressure. An increase in line pressure indicates the presence of cold LN2 vapor, and later liquid, in the pipe. The Y manifold accelerometer signal shows correlated motion.
The accelerometer correlation can also be seen on the previous Sunday. This is not seen clearly during the week because the ACC was nore noisy, presumably due to LVEA activity around 10am each day.
Attached shows ACC signal Sun 8th Sep 2024 correlated to the discharge pressure. Back then we were filling at 8am. It doesn't appear that the beam manifold motion has gotten any worse over the past two months during cp1 fills.
The attached plots shows the BNS range around CP1 fill times for the last six CP1 fills (10 AM PDT) when the IFO was also in the locked state. In four cases among these six, we can see BNS range drop during the CP1 fill. In the remaining two it is not clear whether CP1 fill happened or not. We see a spike in H0:VAC-LY_TERM_M17_CHAN2_IN_MA.mean, but we don't see an extened increase in that channel as we see in the other four cases.
The attached plot show the BNS range variations during the CP1 fill times during the first ~10 days of December. We are plotting only those days when the IFO was in observing (H1:GRD-IFO_OK == 1). For these days, the drop in the BNS range during the fill times seem lower than what we saw during November (plot in the above comment). We also see that the fill times are in general less in these ten days compared to what were in November. Maybe longer the fill time, more the drop in the BNS range!? Also looking at these plots and plots from November, it seem the range might be coming back to a lower value after the fill than it's value before the fill.
V. Xu, R. Short, J. Oberling
Short short version: The PSL NPRO swap is done and IFO recovery has begun. I'll get a more detailed alog in tomorrow, right now I'm exhausted.
Promised details from the final day of the NPRO swap.
Summary
Mode Matching Lens Positions
We first measured the new positions of mode matching lenses L02 and L21, I'll update the As-Built table layout with the new values. The new positions:
Amplifier Recovery
With the previous day's work resulting in the NPRO being ready for amplifier recovery, this is where we started our recovery work. Amplifier recovery was straightfoward. As a reminder, we first measure the power into the amp and the unpumped power out, to assess our intial alignment. Then we raise the amp pump diode operating current in 1A intervals until we get to the locking point, adjusting beam alignment into the amplifier at each step in current (so alignment follows the formation of the thermal lenses in the amplifier crystals). For Amp1 we had 1.612 W input and an unpumped output of 1.252 W. This is 77.6% throughput, which is above our requirement of 65% throughput before starting to pump the amplifier, so we proceeded with recovery of Amp1 (see Amp1 columns in below table). We finished Amp1 recovery with ~70.2 W output, so we calibrated the Amp1 power monitor PD to this value (was off by a couple Watts). We then lowered the light level in the Amp1/Amp2 path (using the High Power Attenuator (HPA) after Amp1) and checked alignment, all looked good. We increased the Amp2 seed with the HPA to ~1.8 W and checked the unpumped output from Amp2. This measured at ~1.5 W, which is ~83% throughput and above our 65% threshold, so we proceeded with recovery of Amp2. This also went very well, see the Amp2 column in the below table; we had ~64.0 W output from Amp2 with an ~1.8 W initial seed power (the power was bouncing between 63.9 W and 64.0 W). With Amp2 fully powered we then used the HPA to increase the Amp2 seed to max, which resulted in ~140.2 W output from Amp2.
Current (A) | Amp1 Output Power (W) | Amp2 Output Power (W) | ||
Initial Pout | Final Pout | Initial Pout | Final Pout | |
1 | 1.25 | 1.25 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
2 | 1.46 | 2.37 | 3.0 | 3.0 |
3 | 6.11 | 8.43 | 9.1 | 9.3 |
4 | 16.6 | 18.1 | 18.2 | 18.4 |
5 | 28.6 | 28.6 | 28.1 | 28.4 |
6 | 39.6 | 39.6 | 38.0 | 38.2 |
7 | 50.3 | 50.4 | 47.4 | 47.5 |
8 | 60.7 | 60.7 | 55.8 | 56.8 |
9 | 70.2 | 70.2 | 63.7 | 64.0 |
Stabilization System Recovery
PMC: After lunch we began recovering the PSL stabilization systems in order: PMC, ISS, FSS. We began by using the HPA after Amp2 to lower the power to ~100 mW to check our beam alignment up to the PMC. All looked good here so we increased the power to max and measured the power incident on the PMC at ~129.4 W. We then toggled the PMC autolock to ON and it locked without issue. We needed to use the picomotor-equipped mirrors (M11 and M12 on the layout) to tweak the beam alignment into the PMC, but were only able to get ~102.0 W in transmission with ~27.0 W in reflection. This is 9 W more than we had after our last NPRO swap, indicating that we really need to take a look at PMC mode matching; since we still had more than enough power to deliver to the IFO we decided to defer the mode matching work to a later Tuesday and continue with PSL recovery. The PMC Trans and Refl monitor PDs were calibrated to the newly measured values; they were pretty close to begin with, but were still 1-2 W different than our power meter was measuring. We then returned the amplifer pump diode currents to their previous operating values (9.0 A and 8.8 A for Amp1, 9.1 A and 9.1 A for Amp2), which lowered Amp1 output power from ~70 W to ~68 W and Amp2 output power from ~140 W to ~139 W; this also changed PMC Refl to ~24 W and PMC Trans to ~104 W, indicating our beam is better matched to our current mode matching solution at these pump diode currents.
ISS: Moving on to the ISS, we first measured the amount of power in our 1st order diffracted beam (the "power bank" for the ISS). With the loop off and the AOM diffracting a default of 4% we expect ~5.7 W in this beam, and this is what we measured. AOM alignment was good, so moved on to the ISS PDs in the ISS box. A voltmeter get plugged into the DC Out ports on the ISS box and a HWP inside the box is adjusted until PD voltages read ~10.0 V. We did this, but noticed the DC voltage reading on the ISS MEDM screen was much higher, ~12.5 V for PDA and ~13 V for PDB. We tried to lock the loop and, as expected with PD voltages that high, the loop thought it needed to removed more power from the beam and ran the diffracted power up really high. We immediately unlocked the ISS and began looking into what could be the problem, as the MEDM reading on the ISS PDs generally matches the voltmeter reading (I say "generally matches" because, for reasons unknown to me, the ISS does not use the DC out from its PDs, it uses a Filter out and "derives" the DC and AC PD voltages from that). The PDs appeared to be working correctly, and we found no large dark voltages that would indicate a PD failure/malfunction. When we unplugged the Filter output the PD reading in MEDM began to slowly climb, but when we blocked the light onto the PDs the MEDM reading went to zero. Looking back at trends we saw the PDs behaving as expected before this most recent NPRO swap, only reading these higher values in MEDM with the relock of the PMC an hour or so prior. I had never seen this behavior in the past, so wasn't quite sure where the problem could be. Thinking maybe something had gone wrong in either the ISS inner loop servo box or maybe something in the CER, we called Fil and asked if he could take a look at the CER electronics for the ISS while we moved on to FSS recovery. It was at this point we found the problem. When the FSS MEDM screen was opened the first thing we saw was one NPRO noise eater (NE) light green, and the other red. The green light was our NE enable monitor, indicating that the NE toggle was switched ON in the PSL software; the red light was our NE monitor, which reads the Check output from our NPRO monitor PD that indicates whether or not the NPRO's relaxation oscillation was being supressed. So we had the NE toggled ON but it was clearly not working, so we toggled it off and on again. The NE monitor went green and the channel monitoring the relaxation oscillation indicated it was working properly, and the ISS PD values on the ISS MEDM screen now read the correct values. So I learned that we have another measure of if the NE is working or not, the ISS PD readings on the MEDM screen go higher. Trending back, the NE stopped working at ~16:58 PST on Thursday, right before Ryan and I left the enclosure for the day. We'll keep an eye on this, as right now it's not clear why the NE turned off. At this point everything looked good for the ISS so we moved on to the FSS.
FSS: For the FSS, we first tried to see if the RefCav would lock with the autolocker; it would not. We had to manually tune the NPRO temperature to find a RefCav resonance, one was found with a slider value of ~ +0.06. The temperature search ranges were adjsuted to this new value and we tried the autolocker again. While we could see clear flashes the autolocker would not grab lock for some reason. The FSS guardian was paused so it would stop yanking the gains around upon lock acquisition, but this did not help, the autolocker refused to hold lock for some reason. So I did it manually (from the FSS manual screen, manually change NPRO temperature until a resonance flashed through, then really quickly move the mouse up to turn the loop on; if the loop grabs go back to the FSS MEDM screen and turn on the Temperature loop, if not then turn the loop off and try again), which worked. With a locked RefCav we measured a RefCav TPD voltage of ~ 0.84 V. The RefCav Refl spot looked pretty centered so we did not do any alignment tuning. This completed our work in the enclosure so we cleaned up, turned the computers and monitors off, left the enclosure, and put it into Science mode. Outside, we scaned the NPRO for mode hop regions and measured TFs of the stabilization loops.
NPRO Temperature Scan
Now outside the enclosure we set up to scan the NPRO temperatures to check for mode hopping. We took the HV Monitor output from the PMC fieldbox to trigger an oscillscope on the PZT ramp and used the PMC Trans PD to monitor the peaks. We set the PMC's alignment ramp to +/- 7.0 V and a 1 Hz scan rate, and monitored the peaks as we tuned the NPRO crystal temperature. We used the slider on the FSS Manual MEDM screen, which gives us a total range of approximately +/- 0.8 °C (0.01 on the slider changes the NPRO crystal temperature by roughly 0.01 °C and the slider goes from -0.8 to +0.8). Since we were close to zero on slider, sitting at ~ +0.07, we started by moving lower (which reduces the NPRO crystal temperature); our starting crystal temperature, as read at the NPRO power supply front panel, was 24.22 °C. We got all the way to the negative end of the slider, which gave a crystal temperature of 23.38 °C, and did not see any evidence of mode hopping on the way down. Heading back up we finally started to see early evidence of mode hopping near the top end of the slider; we could clearly see a new forest of peaks show up in the PMC PZT scan and one of them started to grow noticebly as the temperature was further increased. This mode hop region began at a crystal temperature of 24.76 °C, and the slider maxed out at 24.91 °C. At this point we still had not fully transitioned through the mode hop region, but we did have a peak starting to grow very large indicating that we were almost there. Since we saw no evidence of mode hopping by making the temperature colder, we went back to our starting place of 24.22 °C and then reduced the temperature further to the next RefCav resonance below that; this resulted in a crystal temperature of 23.96 °C at a slider value around -0.17. Again I had to lock the RefCav manually, as the autolocker did not want to grab and hold lock. With all of the stabilization systems locked we moved on to TF measurements.
Transfer Functions and Gains
We started with the PMC. With the current settings we have a UGF of ~1.6 kHz and 60° of phase margin, see first attachment. Everything looked good so we left the PMC alone.
For the ISS, we have a UGF of ~45 kHz and a phase margin of 37.5°, see second attachment. Again, everything look normal here so we left the ISS alone.
For the FSS, we started with a Common gain of 15 dB. Everything looked OK, but since we had seen some potential zero crossings that like to hide in the longer range scans we did a "zoomed in" scan from 100 kHz to 1 MHz. Sure enough, there were a couple peaks in the 500 kHz to 600 kHz range that were pretty close to a zero crossing. We lowered the Common gain to 14 dB to move them away from the potential crossing; the third attachment shows this zoomed in area with the Common gain at 14 dB, and the peaks in question are clearly visible. With this Common gain we have a UGF of ~378 kHz with ~60° of phase margin, see fourth attachment; we took this TF out to 10MHz to check for any weirdness at higher frequency and did not see anything immediately concerning. To finish we took a look at the PZT/EOM crossover (around 20 kHz) to set the Fast gain. The final attachment shows this measurement (a spectrum of IN1) at a Fast gain of 5 dB; this looks OK so we left the Fast gain as is.
At this point the NPRO swap was complete, the PSL was fully recovered, and we handed things over to the commissioning team for IFO recovery. We still need to look at PMC mode matching, and will do so during future Tuesday maintenance periods. This closes WP 12210.