TITLE: 11/23 Day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 148Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY:
Low frequency noise has been a little elevated during this lock and the range is still a bit fuzzy, not totally sure whats causing this.
ITMY modes5/6 are slowly damping down with a gain of +0.02 (nominal is set to -0.02), I set the gain of ITMY5 to 0 in lscparams so ISC_LOCK and the VIOLIN_DAMPING guardians should be reloaded at the next opportunity.
We dropped out of observing briefly for Naoki to adjust SQZing from 20:52UTC till 20:54. We've been locked for 9:20
The H1 range has started to get fuzzy? starting in the 2nd half of yesterdays lock (7 hours into it), Around 07:00UTC (11pm local PST) to be precise and has continued to act this way during todays lock which was automated and locked at 11:16UTC this morning. There was what looked like a glitch/saturation on the SQZ DCPDs right when the range drop increases started but there were no callouts on verbal.
Since I've changed the SEI state back to WINDY the range decreases/drops seem less severe? But its only been like 40 minutes. I don't really see anything really changing on the SQZ scopes looking around 07:00UTC and our current lock. I don't see any drifting or anything weird on the ZMs and FC2 suspensions as well.
I brought us out of Observing at 18:03 UTC to change the SEI config back to WINDY from MICROSEIM and the SQZer unlocked, I also ended up adjusting the SQZ phase after it relocked a bit to bring the live trace on NUC 33 below the ref (188.14 -> 182.45). There were a few SEI diffs after I changed configs, that I accepted.
Back into Observing at 18:11 UTC
Thu Nov 23 10:03:56 2023 INFO: Fill completed in 3min 53secs
TITLE: 11/23 Day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan S
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: SEISMON_ALERT
Wind: 7mph Gusts, 5mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.04 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.26 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
ITMY5 was still rising under nomial gain, so I set it to zero then switched the sign (+0.01 currently) and it seems to be dropping it, but it may be making mode6 rise ever so slightly, its hard to tell.
TITLE: 11/23 Eve Shift: 00:00-08:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 157Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY:
The last hour has shown a drops in range while being in OBSERVING. In the last 30min the range drops have been less severe, but this is an odd one.
Had a few bumps out of observing due to the squeezer, but it would only be for about ~2min as the squeezer relocked itself. L1 came back to Observing this shift.
LOG:
The range fuzziness that started at 11/23 07:02UTC, also mentioned in 74387. From SQZ BLRMs can see that this is in the 80-140Hz region, plot attached. This is not related to SQZ unlock/relock as it was 45 minutes before. The SEI states didn't change at this time. Can't see anything in PEM channels in CS and Ends, plot attached. CS Fan5 appears to change it's readback around an hour after the range fuzziness started, plot attached.
Can see some change in FAN5 around the time the range fuzziness started this morning at 15:31UTC, plot attached.
Ryan C also did some investigation in 74383.
Fan5 seems fine: Eric helped me look into Fan5 and Air Hander 3 that is linked to this fan. This Fan is off but the channels will pick up air flow from other fans. The noise just seems to change on ~few hour period making it look suspiciously in time with DARM fuzziness starting. We see no significant changes in the last few weeks.
DARM while range fuzzy: As suggested by Robert, attached is DARM in two range dips during glitches (yellow at 07:02UTC, red at 08:35UTC) and green was more typical of what DARM looked like during this fuzzy time (DARM broadly increasing and decreasing in 20-200Hz region). I can see no obvious scattering arches but Robert suggested using the Q-transform tool of ldvwweb to check these glitches: Arianna did this in 74455.
Smooth shift (other than initial quick pair of SQZ locklosses) for H1. L1 joined us about 1.75hrs ago.
TITLE: 11/23 Eve Shift: 00:00-08:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 160Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 5mph Gusts, 4mph 5min avg
Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.42 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
While getting the hand off from RyanC, H1 dropped from OBSERVING due to the SQZ being unlocked (and then quickly relocked). And a few minutes later, the same thing happened---where the Squeezer relocked on its own.
Will be mindful of:
Environmentally: microseism is still high, but continues it's trend down from yesterday. Winds are calm.
TITLE: 11/22 Day Shift: 16:00-00:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 160Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY: Quiet day with some SQZ commissioning
18:21UTC Lockloss
18:51 Initial alignment started, finished at 19:16
20:10 NLN
20:25 Observing
20:39 into Commissioning
21:10 GRB-Short E454458 while SQZ comissioning was underway and LLO was still down
ITMY modes 5/6 was rising at a rate of 0.2% per hour (calculated from DTT measurements, 500 - 518 Hz BW=0.002), the broad monitor filter was showing it rising while the narrow was showing it decreasing which was confusing but the DTT measurements confirm its rising under its current settings.
23:00 I started a calibration measurement which finished at 23:30
23:35 back into Observing
23:56 SQZer unlocked and dropped us out of observing, back in at 23:59
LOG:
| Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16:31 | FAC | Karen | H2 enc | N | Tech clean | 16:32 |
| 19:09 | FAC | Cindi | Laundry room | N | Switch laundry | 19:24 |
| 18:54 | FAC | Firechief | Xarm | N | Drive down the arm | 19:20?? |
| 20:15 | FAC | Cindi | Laundry room | N | Get laundry | 20:30 |
| 22:53 | VAC | Travis | Optics lab | N | Parts check | 23:06 |
BB:
Started at 23:00 finished at 23:06
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20231122T230020Z.xml
Simulines:
GPS start: 1384729634.995449
2023-11-22 23:29:03,664 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20231122T230659Z.hdf5
2023-11-22 23:29:03,682 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20231122T230659Z.hdf5
2023-11-22 23:29:03,694 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20231122T230659Z.hdf5
2023-11-22 23:29:03,705 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20231122T230659Z.hdf5
2023-11-22 23:29:03,716 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20231122T230659Z.hdf5
ICE default IO error handler doing an exit(), pid = 418784, errno = 32
GPS end: 1384730961.811799
Sheila, Naoki
Instead of SQZ angle dither servo, we tried the SQZ angle ADF servo. The dither servo seems to work, but the dither makes the squeezing level worse and the SQZ angle the dither servo ended up is not exactly optimal value as reported in 74210. For ADF servo, we made a new guardian state named ADJUST_SQZ_ANG_ADF. This state has the same logic as ADJUST_SQZ_ANG_DITHER which is explained in 74210. We adjusted the ADF demod phase so that the ADF SQZ angle crosses 0 when the SQZ BLRMS4 gets minimum. The attached figure shows that the ADF servo seems to work. When the servo is closed, the ADF SQZ ANG goes to 0, the SQZ BLRMS4 goes to minimum, and the SQZ angle goes to the optimal value at 188 deg. We will leave the ADF servo on and see if it stabilizes the squeezing level next week.
(Jordan V., Gerardo M.)
Yesterday, Jordan and I installed 3 o-ring valves on the filter cavity tube crosses, with this installation the crosses for section B of the filter cavity tube are complete, as far as hardware goes. Most of the equipment used during the installation was moved out of the LVEA and into the filter cavity enclosure, where we are going to start o-ring installation on section "C" next week.
Naoki, Sheila
We tried to move the SRCL digital offset to see if we can reduce the frequency dependence of the squeezing angle. We roughly reproduced similar results to 68814 where Vicky And Elenna did the same test. We think that this method won't be helpful for tuning the SRCL offset to reduce the much smaller frequency dependence of the sqz angle we see in 74256
ref 0: FDS, SRCL offset -175, CLF6 demod phase 189.49 (observing configuration)
ref1: FIS, SRCL offset -175, CLF6 demod phase 189.49
ref2: FIS, SRCL offset -185, CLF6 demod phase 189.49
ref3: FIS, SRCL offset -200, CLF6 198.03
ref4: FIS, SRCL offset -100, CLF6 180
ref5: FIS, SRCL offset +100, CLF6 117.98
We've started our comissioning period at 20:39UTC after reaquiring NLN at 20:10UTC.
Fil, Dave:
Normally all the HWWDs show some activity to indicate they are operational, but ETMX has been quiet for just over 3 months. To verify it is still operational before we go into the holiday season, Fil went to EX and unplugged one of the satellite amp monitor cables from the front of the HWWD unit. It immediately started its 20 minute countdown. The cable was reattached after only a few seconds.
ndscope 30 day trend (https://lhocds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/exports/dave/hwwd_30_day.png) in attachment shows the single ETMX data point from yesterday.
At 05:22:13 Tue 21st November 2023 PST most, but not all, Dolphin IPC receivers on h1sush7 recorded a single receive error.
Attachment shows timemachine capture of h1susfc1 and h1sussqzin IPC receive MEDMs.
I think this is the first non-forced spontaneous IPC receive error we have seen during O4, so it warrents a FRS ticket:
https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~lockloss/index.cgi?event=1384712509
We saw some motion in the 1-3 Hz bandwidth at the corner station, and ASC_P saw some motion in the CS signals: INP1, MICH, PRC2...
Reaquired NLN at 20:10UTC
Artem, Gabriele, Sheila, Louis Plots and Jupyter notebook with these results are also available here.ESD quadratic noise
This is a follow up on investigation of potential non-stationary noise at Handford introduced by the ESD drive, reported in 73913 and previous entries linked from there. The idea is that from the ESD signal, Vs, and bias, Vb, voltages we can reconstruct ESD force applied to the mirror, using equations in LIGO-T1700446. The force component linear in Vs gets subtracted by the control loop and therefore does not affect DARM. But the force component quadratic in Vb and both linear and quadratic in Vb can couple to DARM. Therefore in this report, we are calculating respective force components and projecting them to DARM. Then respective ASDs and spectrograms are compared.Selection of input channels
The ESD drive voltages are recorded by Monitors, H1:SUS-ETMX_L3_LVESDAMON_LL_OUT_DQ for Vs and H1:SUS-ETMX_L3_ESDAMON_DC_OUT_DQ for Vb. Important note here: we initially tried channel H1:SUS-ETMX_L3_ESDAMON_UL_OUT_DQ to get Vb, but it looks like it's not connected to anything and recording ASD noise... The H1:SUS-ETMX_L3_ESDAMON_DC_OUT_DQ seems to be fine. Also, LIGO-T1700446 specifies calibrations for voltage channels (equations 13 and 16), but currently the channels mentioned above are already calibrated to voltage.![]()
Calculating force terms
Calculation is based on equation 3 in LIGO-T1700446, but this equation is modified in the following way:
I did the same exercise but now for GPS time 1382909598 (and up to +22 mins from it), where bias voltage was set at 409V. Below you find plots where you can see that noise went up* (ASD) but apparent non-stationarity is reduced (spectrograms), which is consistent with Gabriele's findings in comment in 73935, specifically this and this plots.![]()
* Currently noise ASD is actually higher than DARM, this is not realistic but the modelling is not 100% precise. What is important here is relative changes with respect to results with "standard" level of bias voltage. Plots and Jupyter notebook with these results are also available here.
Another way to look at ESD quadratic noise. The DARM strain band-limited RMS (computed between 16 and 30 Hz and normalized to the median over time) is correlated to the total RMS of the ESD drive (dominated by the low frequency component, below 10 Hz)