TITLE: 07/19 Owl Shift: 07:00-15:00 UTC (00:00-08:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 127Mpc
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 6mph Gusts, 5mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.04 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Taking over from Austin. H1 has been locked for 3.5 hours.

• All systems look good; ground motion and wind are low
• Austin gave me the run-down on Shiela's OM2 script; I'll monitor it and accept SDFs as things change every 2 hours

TITLE: 07/18 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 135Mpc
SHIFT SUMMARY:

- Acquired NLN @ 23:32, OBSERVING @ 0:00 (waited in NLN w/ WHITENING off due to DCPD saturations), held in OMC WHITENING for ~45 minutes

- Sheila is running a OM2 heater script that will occassionally take us out of obseving, will note times and accepted SDFs

• Killed script due to lockloss - will rerun next lock

- EQ mode activated @ 0:30, seeing motion in ASC and in SEI overview, no alert from USGS so this might have been local ground motion

• Lockloss @ 0:32 due to this seismic activity
• 0:36 - 6.5 EQ from El Salvador

- Relocking was unaided, waiting at OMC WHITENING to damp violins

- 2:59 - inc 5.0 EQ from El Salvador - successfully rode this one out

- Acquired NLN @ 3:29/OBSERVE @ 3:34

- Restarted Sheila's OM2 test (script is running on cdsws04) @ 1373779900 - in COMMISSIONING - attached are accepted screenshots from the OM2 test

• Back to OBSERVING @ 1373780325

- The ETM cameras have both been crashing on nuc 26 - Tagging CDS

- Leaving H1 to Ryan S. going on a 3.5 hour lock stretch

LOG:

No log for this shift.

Following the lockloss from an EQ, H1 is currently sitting in OMC WHITENING waiting for the violins to damp before we go back into NLN.

This time focusing on the 1.5 to 3.5 Hz band to resolve the structure around 2.6 Hz.

The noise injection ran between 1373756179 (2023/07/18 22:56 UTC) and 1373758142 (2023/07/18 23:28 UTC)

Not sure if what we see is real, but here's a fit, in s-domain, of the plant (optics plus suspension, with the controller divided out)

z = [-0.33515061+16.35437768j, -0.33515061-16.35437768j,
        -0.88008293+11.64561682j, -0.88008293-11.64561682j,
        -0.60031816 +3.15253939j, -0.60031816 -3.15253939j,
        -0.74195821 +2.5870795j , -0.74195821 -2.5870795j ,
        -0.70804008 +0.43354112j, -0.70804008 -0.43354112j]
p = [-0.57517567+17.98772839j, -0.57517567-17.98772839j,
        -0.11588748+16.31442876j, -0.11588748-16.31442876j,
        -0.55863455+15.02245062j, -0.55863455-15.02245062j,
        -0.19628544 +6.5741992j , -0.19628544 -6.5741992j ,
        -1.37239773 +2.79248047j, -1.37239773 -2.79248047j,
        -0.33923225 +2.70011481j, -0.33923225 -2.70011481j,
        -1.05551599 +0.j        , -0.12652314 +0.j        ]
k = -126469.31513966424

Jenne, Naoki

As reported in alog71412, the lockloss triggers were not installed in PI damping models so we installed them in the PI damping models following the violin damping model. The first and second attached figures show the updated h1susetmxpi and h1susitmpi models. The h1susetmypi model is also updated in the same way as the h1susetmxpi model. The models were successfully built and Dave will restart them in the next Tuesday maintenance.

What we did:

• To send the lockloss trigger from the h1lsc to the PI damping models, we added H1:LSC-TRIG-IFO_PCIE_ENDX for h1susetmxpi, H1:LSC-TRIG-IFO_PCIE_ENDY for h1susetmypi, and H1:LSC-TRIG-IFO_PCIE for h1susitmpi.
• We added multipliers in the PI damping outputs. When the lockloss happens, the lockloss trigger is 0 and it is multiplied with the PI damping outputs.

Lockloss @ 0:32, most likely due to local ground motion/EQ (was not reported on USGS).

Ibrahim A, Oli P.

Following the end of Tuesday maintainance, conducted a sweep of the LVEA. During walk around, noted (but did not unplug) the extension cord for the clean room lights/filter located outside of the PSL (photo).

We found two dead crickets and heard one cricket chirping under one of the ITM's, but couldn't see it.

on cdsws04, there is a script running that will step the darm offset up and down for a few minutes, then step up the heat on om2, wait two hours for the thermal transient, and repeat this process 4 times.

The DARM offset steps will cause an SDF diff that will knock H1 out of observing, after it finishes each set of darm offset steps and move om2 the operators can take us back to observing.  the om2 heater will cause some SDF diffs which can be accepted for tonight. 

If the operators need to stop the script (if there is a reason to stand down or if H1 losses lock) you can hit control c on the terminal on cdsws04. 

This script also sets the DARM offset TRAMP to 5seconds, I've accepted this in SDF for now but it will go back to 1 second next lock.

I did some testing of the H1_MANAGER node today with some good successes. The node tried to lock as normal after maintenance, got to DRMI locking and then the (shortened for test) timer expired so it started to run an initial alignment. Initial alignment was automatic until the last step (SRC alignment, where we had to step in). We weren't able to get SRY to lock even by hand, so I manualed INIT_ALIGN to compete which then triggered H1_MANAGER to start normal locking again. Overall, I think this node is ready to test while monitored by an operator for a few days. Perhaps we will try tomorrow.

More details - In the past the transition between locking and initial alignment ran into a few issues with ISC_LOCK stalling and the reviving by H1_MANAGER got tricky. I wrote a new decorator to request a particular state the ISC_LOCK node whenever it stalls. This is a bit constraining, but works for this case. I also reorganized the state graph a bit to make it a bit easier to be turned off or on as needed. Currently, it's only looking at timers to trigger an initial alignment, but I'd like to add something smarter eventually and at least we should have it trigger if it's run CHECK_MICH fringes more than once or similar.

TITLE: 07/18 Eve Shift: 23:00-07:00 UTC (16:00-00:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Preventive Maintenance
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 14mph Gusts, 12mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.04 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

- IFO currently waiting in OMC WHITENING while the violin modes damp

- CDS/SEI/DMs ok

TITLE: 07/18 Day Shift: 15:00-23:00 UTC (08:00-16:00 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Preventive Maintenance
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 12mph Gusts, 10mph 5min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.04 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

Greasing Fans  Bubba & Chris Completed

Ken VPW & OSB installing lights.

OMC Scans done by Kieta & Danielle completed

4 IPS Teacher Tours completed , by TJ, Camilla, Jenne, and Fred.

CDS ETMX Digial CAM Moved , Completed by Patrick required DAQ Restart.

Beam Splitter Loop Charactization was completed by Jeff.  

DAQ Restarts were completed at 18:52 UTC

Sei Ham8 ISI restarts started but but wiped the values in the safe.snap. That has now been resolved. 18:54 UTC

PSL tuning Completed by Jason & Oli

LVEA LASER HAZARD!! for HWFS work with Camilla and PEM Guilotine work 18:31 UTC

PSL tuning Completed by Jason & Oli In Box work complete 20:02UTC  finished working on ISS and may need target of oppertunity to adjust after the PSL comes to Thermal eq. later 20:21UTC

LVEA LASER SAFE !

PEM Guilotine work has been completed 20:15 UTC

Relocking started at 20:35 UTC

Mid Y HEPTA Pump turned on for a few minutes during Lock acquisition.

VAC HEPTA started early this morning and is still ongoing and will last until 4pm.

Locking Notes:
We used H1 Manager to do most of an Initial Alignment, but we got stuck in ALIGN_IFO - SRC_ALIGN.

Optimized ASC-AS_A_DC_NSUM_OUT16 for maximum Peaks and Valleys.
And used AS Air to get a good looking spot.

21:48 UTC
TJ then tried a work around to trick the gaurdians into locking.  
 
Check violins at 22:08 UTC

OMC_WHITENING @ 22:44 UTC

Camilla, Marissa, WP11308

Cao noticed that the ITM HWS SLEDs had decayed in 71328. This morning Marissa and I swapped both following procedure T1500193. There was no measurable power out of the old sleds ~3mW out of the new ones. 

ITMX: Old S/N 07.14.255, New: QSDM-790-5 S/N 05.21.346 (2.5mW = 120mA, trimpot to 480mW)

ITMY Old: S/N 11.17.127, New: QSDM-840-5 S/N 11.21.303 (2.5mW = 115mA, trimpot to 460mW)

SLED inventory in 66832, SLEDs last swapped in Dec 2022 66179. Still need to check that there is the correct amount of light on the HWS cameras and maybe update the camera frame rate.

At 19:25UTC, while we were at the chassis, the CO2X laser tripped off with the "temp" warning light. This warning light didn't go away until I power cycled the chassis. CO2X then turned on and locked fine.

J. Oberling, O. Patane

Today we did some alignment tweaks for the PMC and FSS RefCav.

Before going into the PSL enclosure (and disrupting its thermal equilibrium), I remotely tweaked the beam alignment into the PMC.  This was done with the ISS OFF (as otherwise the ISS sees any change in PMC Trans as something it needs to correct for, and we do not want this).  Results:

• Start
  • PMC Trans: ~108.8 W
  • PMC Refl: ~17.0 W
• End
  • PMC Trans: ~109.3 W
  • PMC Refl: ~16.4 W

So some improvement, but not quite as much as I had hoped (we've been under 16.0 W on PMC Refl in the past), so it may be time to increase the amplifier injection currents a little.  Will continue to monitor the PMC.

That done, Oli and I went into the PSL enclosure to manually tweak the on-table FSS RefCav alignment.  After a safety overview of the PSL table (as it was Olli's first time in the enclosure), we began by taking a power budget of the FSS beam path.  This was done with the ISS ON.

• FSS In: 294.6 mW
• AOM In: 288.0 mW
• AOM Out, Single Pass: 195.1 mW
  • Single Pass Diffraction Efficiency: 67.7%
• AOM Out, Double Pass: 130.2 mW
  • Double Pass Diffraction Efficiency: 66.7%
• EOM Out: 130.3 mW

Both the single and double pass diffraction efficiency are lower than usual, which makes sense as at last remote alignment I was unable to return the RefCav TPD to its normal levels.  We adjusted the AOM alignment to improve the single pass diffraction, and mirror M21 to improve the double pass diffraction.  Results:

• AOM In: 288.0 mW
• AOM Out, Single Pass: 216.9 mW
  • Single Pass Diffraction Efficiency: 75.3%
• AOM Out, Double Pass: 157.8 mW
  • Double Pass Diffraction Efficiency: 72.8%

Much better.  We then had to slightly adjust the EOM position to ensure the entrance and exit apertures were centered on the beam (to prevent any internal clipping), and then proceeded to recover the RefCav.  The alignment was far enough off that we needed to use the iris mounted in front of the RefCav to recover the alignment, then locked the RefCav and used the picomotor-controlled mirrors to tweak the alignment and improve the TPD.  At the end the TPD was ~0.94V.  To finish, we aligned the beam onto the RefCav RFPD, and measured the RefCav's visibility.

• Unlocked: 1.311 V
• Locked: 0.225 V
• Visibility: 82.8%

This is roughly where we had it last time the on-table alignment was tweaked back in May.  We then turned the ISS OFF and left the enclosure and returned it to Science Mode.

Back in the Control Room I turned the ISS back ON, at its usual RefSignal value of -2.01V, and the diffracted power % dove to almost 0%.  I had to increase the RefSignal to -1.97V to get the diffracted power % to ~2.0% (I did not accept this in SDF yet, as it will likely need to be adjusted soon as the enclosure warms up).  In addition, the PMC Refl power had increased over the course of the incursion to ~18.3 W, almost 2 W higher than when we went in.  This was all expected as an enclosure incursion disrupts the internal thermal equilibrium of the enclosure (and why we like to do these as early in the maintenance window as possible).  As the thermal environment equalizes I expect the diffracted power % to go up and PMC Refl to go down; both may need to be adjusted as a T.O.O. in the coming days, or next Tuesday, whichever comes first.  I'll keep an eye on the PSL over the coming days and adjust things as necessary (most likely ISS RefSignal adjustments, as those are quick during a lockloss recovery; any necessary PMC tweaks may likely wait until next Tuesday).  I've tagged OpsInfo so the EVE and OWL shift operators are aware of this.  This closes WP 11309.

Comparing the new ramped fill, where the LLCV is opened linearly from its operational value to 100% over 5 minutes, with the unramped opening (takes about 5 seconds) the main difference is the removal of the sudden jump in discharge line pressure and temperatures at the start of the fill.

Log and linear comparison plots are attached showing today's and Sunday's fills.

Notes below:

Output mode cleaner tube turbo station;
     Scroll pump hours: 5556.6
     Turbo pump hours: 5600.6
     Crash bearing life is at 100%

X beam manifold turbo station;
     Scroll pump hours: 779.0
     Turbo pump hours: 774.1
     Crash bearing life is at 100%

Y beam manifold turbo station;
     Scroll pump hours: 1873.9
     Turbo pump hours: 592.6
     Crash bearing life is at 100%

Summary:

This is a continuation of single bounce beam analysis. In the past we've done OM2 hot/cold measurements for ITMX in alog 70502 and 71100, this time we've done a different thing (OM2 cold, ITM CO2 off/on for ITMY beam).

When ITM CO2 was off, the OMC scan looked like the first attached (for Jennie: about 16:46:35 - 16:47:58 UTC). 20 peak is ~1.0 while 00 peak is ~16 (off the scale in the plot).

With CO2 heating of 1W (started ~16:51:13) , the 20 peak started decreasing but it was much, much slower than we expected.

At around 17:25:00 UTC we had to stop due to other maintenance tasks. The last usable scan before this (for Jennie: 17:23:08-17:24:38 UTC) is shown in the second attachment. 20 peak was still slowly decreasing, but anyway at that moment 20 peak was down to 0.6.

Given this slow time constant, Daniel points out that maybe we should have waited longer after the IFO unlocked before starting the single bounce scan (both for today and for the past measurements). FYI IFO was unlocked at about 15:07 UTC.

I'll do my mode matching simulation as soon as Jennie gets the 20/(20+00) numbers.

What was done:

10W into IMC, ITMY single bounce. ASC-AS_A and AS_B DC centering (DC3 and DC4) were on. RF sidebands were turned off.

Manually locked OMC (OMC guardian auto, asked for prep-omc-scan, then go manual, scan the OMC-PZT2_EXC to find 00 peak, stop scan and adjust the PZT2_OFFSET so we're on the 00 resonance, ask for OMC_LSC_ON, then OMC_Locked and go AUTO, that's what I kind of remember).

Manually refined the alignment using OM3 and OMCS. Disabled the OMC LSC, OMC guardian DOWN, and started scanning. We ended up using 0.01Hz Ramp signal with 110V amplitude (PZT2_OFFSET zero) to make sure to use the full range of the PZT.

OM2 was cold throughout the scan (H1:AWC-OM2_TSAMS_THERMISTOR_1_TEMPERATURE=21.748 to 21.749, H1:AWC-OM2_TSAMS_THERMISTOR_2_TEMPERATURE= 22.149 to 22.147)

TCS was off at first. The first scan (16:45:35-16:47:58) was about 1h 40min after the lock loss.

TCS central heating of 1W was turned on at about 16:51:13.

Daniel restored the RF SBs and brought all settings back.

WP 11315.

Dave, Erik, Patrick

The ETMY camera has been moved from h1digivideo2 to the new code running on h1digivideo3.

Note that the cameras running on this code (all those on h1digivideo3) have an additional channel:
{channel_prefix}VALID: 1 if and only if there has been a successful iteration through the image grab loop and the last iteration through the image grab loop succeeded. (read only)

Monitoring this channel should be a better way to check for image freezes than monitoring the centroid positions.

The full list of channels is in the wiki.

Erik has updated the script that starts the camera client on the control room wall screens.

Dave is updating the DAQ.

HAM6 floor accelerometer reported as not working, alog 71133. Cable located in CER connected to the new LIGO accelerometer chassis, channel 12. Other end of cable located on east door of HAM6. Cable previously repaired, short found in cable by HAM6. Cable cut a few feet to eliminate the short. New cable length does not reach the HAM6 floor accelerometer. A short patch cable will be made and installed next Tuesday.

Mode matching of the single bounce beam to the OMC is really bad and we don't know why. We don't even know the beam shape of the single bounce beam hitting the OMC. I constrained the beam shape by looking at the OMC scan data.

There are many OMC single bounce scans but the most recent two w/o RF SBs, one with cold and the other with hot OM2, were carefully analyzed by Jennie to resolve 02 and 20 mode as separate peaks (alogs 70502 and 71100), so I used them here.

If you just want to see the results, look at the third panel of the first attachment.

X-axis is the normalized waist position difference, Y-axis is the normalized waist radius difference. From the measured cold mode matching loss of 11.5%(!!) and hot loss of 6.2%, and the fact that the loss changed by only changing the ROC of OM2, the beam parameters hitting the OMC were constrained to two patches per each OM2 ROC. Yellow is when OM2 is cold, blue is when OM2 is hot. Arrows show how cold (yellow) patches are transformed to hot (blue) patches when OM2 ROC is changed by heating.

Note that we're talking about inconceivably huge mismatching parameters. For example, about -0.3 normalized waist position difference (left yellow patch) means that the waist of the beam is ~43cm upstream of the OMC waist. Likewise, about +0.3 normalized waist radius difference  means that the beam waist radius is 690um when it should be 490um.

We cannot tell (yet) which patch is closer to reality, but in general we can say that:

• The beam is too big (Normalized waist radius difference is positive) when the OM2 is cold.
• If the reality is more like the patches on the left half of the plot, making ROC even smaller will give us a better matching.
• If on the right half of the plot, changing ROC won't do much, we need to change the distance between OM2 and OMC.

There are many caveats. The first one is important. Others will have limited impact on the analysis.

• We don't know yet if this "MM loss" measurement is really a fair representation of mode decomposition of the beam hitting the OMC. If for example there's a position-dependent loss  (e.g. dust particulates on the OMC mirrors close to the center of the beam spot, it doesn't have to be on HR, it could be on AR of input or output coupler) the analysis will be totally off. Separate evaluation needs to be made to make sure that this isn't (or is) the case.
• I assumed that the distance between OM2 and OMC waist is as designed (~37cm). This sounds like a fair assessment as the error of a few cm hardly matters (1.4cm error corresponds to the normalized mismatch parameter of 0.01).
• I assumed that the measured MM loss could have +-10% fractional error, i.e. loss=(1+-0.1)*lossMeasured.
• I assumed that the ROC is 2m cold and 1.75m hot, but I haven't checked the thermistor, so these numbers could be off, which could have a minor impact.
• I assumed that the beam is round w/o astigmatism.

Moving forward:

• It would be difficult to down-select one of the two pairs of patches by going to the middle heating setting. It might be possible to use ITM central heating or maybe PR3. I'll look at the Gouy phase of these relative to OM2.
• Even if we can down-select, that won't give us any REAL guidance as to what we should do. We WILL see what to do to make the single bounce matching better, but doing so w/o understanding why is a risky thing. Besides, doing so might make our jitter coupling in full lock worse.
• Aforementioned characterization of the schmutz. For that matter, I suddenly remembered that Daniel wanted to see the QPD/OMCREFL ratio when I was calibrating the OMCREFL. That might help or not but I'll pull the data.
• We can do a similar analysis for full locked IFO beam.