Master list of LHO satamp swap results

Firstly I am very sorry for the length of this alog

I needed to finish up the comparisons for the satamps that were swapped on Tuesday (86207), as well as rerun almost all of the other comparison damp regression plots for every suspension that has had its satamp swapped out for ECR E2400330, either with different times or with the loop suppression divided out. There were also multiple changes made to the damp_regression_compare.m file. So I've gone and done that, so here are the results in this master post. I will link to the old results when applicable. They are out of order as compared to when their satamps were swapped.

damp_regression_compare.m
Now creates a plot of the ratios, lists important IFO info, and saves some of the variables to a .mat file
found in /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/Common/MatlabTools/damp_regression_compare.m
newest version is r12583

Input
IM1
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM1_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM1_M1_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM1_M1_1437330256_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM1_M1_1438626136_1200.mat
r12561

IM2
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM2_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM2_M1_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM2_M1_1437330256_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM2_M1_1438626136_1200.mat
r12562

IM3
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM3_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM3_M1_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM3/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM3_M1_1437330256_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM3/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM3_M1_1438626136_1200.mat
r12563

IM4
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM4/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM4_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM4/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSIM4_M1_1437330256vs1438626136-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM4/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM4_M1_1437330256_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HAUX/H1/IM4/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSIM4_M1_1438626136_1200.mat
r12560

MC1(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M1_NoiseComparison_1437192600vs1437240215-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M1_1437192600vs1437240215-1200.mat
r12557

MC2(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC2_M1_NoiseComparison_1436631330vs1438441235-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC2_M1_1436631330vs1438441235-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC2_M1_1438441235_1200.mat
r12554

MC3(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M1_NoiseComparison_1437115850vs1437282002-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC3/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M1_1437115850vs1437282002-1200.mat
r12558

PRM(original results)(added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPRM_M1_NoiseComparison_1435154988vs1435435046-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PRM/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPRM_M1_1435154988vs1435435046-1200.mat
r12559

PR2(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR2_M1_NoiseComparison_1435154988vs1436654703-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/PR2/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR2_M1_1435154988vs1436654703-1200.mat
r12556

PR3(original results)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M1_NoiseCompare_H1SUSPR3_M1_NoiseComparison_1435348334vs1435435046-1200.pdf
r12533
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M1_1435348334vs1435435046-1200.mat
r12565

BS(original results)(added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSBS_M1_NoiseComparison_1435062667vs1435435038-1200.pdf
r12535
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSBS_M1_1435062667vs1435435038-1200.mat
r12567
Data (new before time):
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/BSFM/H1/BS/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSBS_M1_1435062667_1200.mat
r12535

Output
SRM(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSRM_M1_NoiseComparison_1435154988vs1435435046-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SRM/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSRM_M1_1435154988vs1435435046-1200.mat
r12568

SR2(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR2_M1_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/SR2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR2_M1_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12569

SR3(original results)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR3_M1_NoiseComparison_1435348334vs1435435046-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/SR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSSR3_M1_1435348334vs1435435046-1200.mat
r12570

OMC
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OMCS/H1/OMC/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSOMC_M1_NoiseComparison_1437330259vs1438454240-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OMCS/H1/OMC/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSOMC_M1_1437330259vs1438454240-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OMCS/H1/OMC/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSOMC_M1_1438454240_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/OMCS/H1/OMC/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSOMC_M1_1437330259_1200.mat
r12582

SQZ
FC1
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSFC1_M1_NoiseComparison_1437766177vs1438449277-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSFC1_M1_1437766177vs1438449277-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSFC1_M1_1437766177_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSFC1_M1_1438449277_1200.mat
r12572

FC2
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSFC2_M1_NoiseComparison_1437766177vs1438449277-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC2/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSFC2_M1_1437766177vs1438449277-1200.mat
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSFC2_M1_1437766177_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/FC2/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSFC2_M1_1438449277_1200.mat
r12573

ITMs
ITMX M0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_M0_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_M0_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12574

ITMX R0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_R0_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMX/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMX_R0_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12575

ITMY M0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_M0_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_M0_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12576

ITMY R0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_R0_NoiseComparison_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ITMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSITMY_R0_1435482383vs1436080373-1200.mat
r12577

ETMs
ETMX M0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_M0_NoiseComparison_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_M0_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.mat
r12578

ETMX R0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_R0_NoiseComparison_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_R0_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.mat
r12578

ETMX L1(original results)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGL1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_L1_NoiseComparison_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMX/SAGL1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMX_L1_1435060998vs1436769334-1200.mat
r12579

ETMY M0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_M0_NoiseComparison_1436521059vs1438453617-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_M0_1436521059vs1438453617-1200.mat
r12580
Data (new after time):
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_M0_1438453617_1200.mat
r12548

ETMY R0(original results) (added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_R0_NoiseComparison_1436521059vs1438453617-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_R0_1436521059vs1438453617-1200.mat
r12580
Data (new before and after time):
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_R0_1436521059_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_R0_1438453617_1200.mat
r12550

TMSs
TMSX(original results)(added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSX/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSX_M1_NoiseComparison_1435150628vs1437199319-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSX/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSX_M1_1435150628vs1437199319-1200.mat
r12553

TMSY(original results)(added loop suppression)
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSY/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSY_M1_NoiseComparison_1437213557vs1437257352-1200.pdf
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSY/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSY_M1_1437213557vs1437257352-1200.mat
r12581

Ops Day Shift End

TITLE: 08/07 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY: Locked for 4 hours, observing for 35min. Had a bit of a pivot today since we needed to clear some tumbleweeds from the overpass. This took up much of our commissoining time, as well as an earthquake delaying lock reacquistion, so we were approved for some afternoon commissioning.
LOG:

• 1530 Calibration
• 1615 Lock loss - alog86240
  • While relocking an earthquake rolled through and delayed relocking a bit
  • I needed to run a check MICH, then PRMI where I touched up PRM, then it locked fully.
• 1936 Recovered back to low noise, time for commissoining
• 2255 Observing

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
19:33	SAF	Laser HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA is Laser HAZARD	11:33
15:02	SPI	Jeff	Opt Lab	YES	Fiber collimation	18:41
15:35	PEM	Robert	LVEA	YES	Measurement setup and peeking through viewports	18:34
15:42	FAC	Chris, Randy	Overpass	n	Tumbleweed clearing	18:35
16:09	VAC	Janos, Anna	MX, MY	n	Taking a look	16:37
16:13	FAC	Kim, Nelly	OSB rec.	n	Opening rollup door and driving out stuffs	16:53
18:05	ISC	Jennie, Francisco	Opt Lab	YES	Using laser and oscilliscope	18:05
18:48	VAC	Gerardo	LVEA	yes	Checking on turbo pumps	18:58
19:34	PEM	Robert	LVEA	YES	Pictures at view ports	21:34
20:38	ISC	Elenna	LVEA	YES	Plugging in cable at PSL racks	20:58
20:58	FAC	Tyler	EY	n	Chiller yard check	21:28
22:00	ISC	Elenna	LVEA	YES	Unplugging cable at PSL racks	22:05
22:27	PEM	Robert	LVEA	YES	Shutting measurements down	22:33
22:28	PCAL	Francisco	PCAL lab	Yes	PCAL or SPI	22:31
23:05	ISC	Jennie	Opt Lab	YES	ISS array work	23:24

Ops Eve Shift Start

TITLE: 08/07 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: TJ
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 13mph Gusts, 5mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.07 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: H1 just returned to observing after commissioning for most of the day and has been locked for over 3 hours.

• Wind coming down and ground motion low
• All other systems nominal

OPO trans power reduced

Camilla noted that the Opo pump iss was close to saturating, because our launched power has increased quickly at this new crystal position. 

I've reduced the OPO trans set point to 75 uW from 80uW, which brought the control signal back to 2.5 V.

SATMON updated

I've updated some of the thresholds on SATMON.adl for suspensions that have had their DAC cards upgraded in recent months, alog84509. The 18 bit thresholds have been updated to 20 bit for the following

BS M1 F1F2F3LF RTSD

ITMY M0 F1F2F3SD LFRT

ITMY L1 ULLLURLR

ITMX M0 F1F2F3SD LFRT

ITMX L1 ULLLURLR

TCS Chiller Water Level Top-Off - Biweekly

FAMIS 27821

No water was added to either chiller as levels are still good, although slowly dropping over the past several weeks. Updated T2200289 tracking sheet.

Filters and steel mesh in both chillers looked good. No water in leak checking cup.

Frequency injection cable has been plugged in

I went out to plug in the frequency noise injection cable at the PSL racks and found it was already plugged it. This is probably my fault- a quick alog search turned up this alog, written by me: 85363. So it maybe have been plugged in for over a month while we were in observing.

Thu CP1 Fill

Thu Aug 07 10:07:03 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 6min 59secs

 

Lockloss

Lockloss at 2025-08-07 16:15UTC after 5.5 hours Locked due to some fast tractoring it's looking like an ETMX glitch :(

Calibration Sweep 1530 UTC

Ran our usual calibration measurements this morning following the wiki instructions. We plan to make some bias changes and then run this again. I'll comment to this log with that info.

Simulines start:

PDT: 2025-08-07 08:36:03.467961 PDT
UTC: 2025-08-07 15:36:03.467961 UTC
GPS: 1438616181.467961

Simulines end:

PDT: 2025-08-07 08:59:22.221768 PDT
UTC: 2025-08-07 15:59:22.221768 UTC
GPS: 1438617580.221768

Files:

2025-08-07 15:59:22,060 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_
20250807T153604Z.hdf5
2025-08-07 15:59:22,068 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DA
RM_SS_20250807T153604Z.hdf5
2025-08-07 15:59:22,072 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_
L1_SS_20250807T153604Z.hdf5
2025-08-07 15:59:22,077 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_
L2_SS_20250807T153604Z.hdf5
2025-08-07 15:59:22,081 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_
L3_SS_20250807T153604Z.hdf5
 

Lock loss 0831UTC (6 hours ago)

1438590708

The lock loss that we had over night was unfortunately an ETMX glitch. We hadn't seen one since changing the ETMX bias July 28th so we were hopeful that it was the fix. Sad.

Ops Day Shift Start

TITLE: 08/07 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 144Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 5mph Gusts, 1mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Locked for almost 4 hours. Had a GRB (E587865) short come through at 1046UTC just a few minutes after we got to observing. Plan for today is commissioning and calibration from 1530-1900UTC.

OPS Eve Shift Summary

TITLE: 08/07 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan C
SHIFT SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING since Aug 5 22:22 UTC (30 hr 40 min lock!)

Nothing to add other than well done everyone (particularly comissioners) for contributing to such a stable IFO state - this is definitely the O4c record so far.

LOG:

None

Corrected OSEM estimator fits for SR3 Yaw

Ivey,

I finished the yaw-to-yaw transfer functions for the OSEM estimator using the corrected measurements that Oli took for SR3 yesterday [see LHO: 86202].

The fits were added to the Sus SVN and live inside '~/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/Common/FilterDesign/Estimator/fits_H1SR3_2025-08-05.mat'. They are already calibrated to work on the filter banks for the estimator and can be installed using 'make_SR3_yaw_model.m', which is in the same folder.

Attached below are two images of the fits for the estimator.

The first attachment shows the Suspoint Y to M1 DAMP Y fit. The zpk for this fit is

'zpk([0,0,-0.027+20.489i,-0.064+11.458i,-0.027-20.489i,-0.064-11.458i],[-0.072+6.395i,-0.072-6.395i,-0.096+14.454i,-0.096-14.454i,-0.062+21.267i,-0.062-21.267i],-0.001)'

The first attachment shows the Suspoint Y to M1 DAMP Y fit. The zpk for this fit is

'zpk([-0.002+19.224i,-0.007+8.31i,-0.002-19.224i,-0.007-8.31i],[-0.06+6.398i,-0.06-6.398i,-0.091+14.439i,-0.091-14.439i,-0.074+21.29i,-0.074-21.29i],12.184)'

Ops Day Shift Summary

TITLE: 08/06 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY: Very quiet day with H1 observing throughout except for just a few minutes this morning. H1 has now been locked for over 25 hours.
LOG:

• 15:34 - Dropped observing from SQZ PMC volts railing
• 15:38 - Observing

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
19:33	SAF	Laser HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA is Laser HAZARD	Ongoing
15:43	CAL	Rick	PCal Lab	Local	SPI BS measurements	17:11
15:43	FAC	Kim	Optics Lab	N	Technical cleaning	16:14
16:19	CAL	Dripta	PCal Lab	Local	SPI BS measurements	17:11
17:52	FAC	Randy	MY	N	Looking for materials	18:22
18:34	SPI	Jeff	Optics Lab	N	SPI measurements	19:56
19:57	VAC	Travis	MX	N	Leak checking	20:30
20:53	CDS	Marc	MY	N	Looking for parts	21:31
21:14	VAC	Travis, Janos	MX	N	Pump checks	21:20
21:20	ISC	Camilla	Optics Lab	N	Sorting totes	22:38
21:44	SPI	Jeff	Optics Lab	Local	SPI measurements	23:11
21:54	ISC	Jennie	Optics Lab	Local	ISS array work	22:50
22:21	CAL	Dripta	PCal Lab	Local	SPI BS measurements	22:38
23:07	ISC	Jennie	Optics Lab	-	Checking code	23:14

ISC vs. DAMP Pitch and Yaw Control Request for H1SUSMC1 Top Mass (M1)

J. Kissel

I'm are trying to figure out the best metrics for showing off the improvements to the OSEM PD's satellite amplifier's whitening improvements.
Thus far, Oli's been using the input to the damping loops as the metric, using a regression of the corresponding ISI's GS13s to subract out a fit of how much of that sensor signal is seismic noise, and dividing out the loop suppression -- see LHO:86149 for the most recent examples comparing before vs. after the sat amp upgrade. 
Without the presence of any other noise or control signals, that should be a fair comparison of the OSEM PD's sensor noise improvement.
However, for a lot of these comparisons ISC control signals are complicating the comparison -- usually at low frequency where ISC control is typically distributed to the top masses.

I use this aLOG as an example of how to better understand this contribution breakdown for a relatively simple suspension -- H1SUSMC1 -- which only has P and Y ISC control from the IMC WFS. (Longitudinal control for IMC L is fed to MC2). This will also be interesting in the future 
    :: in the context of how SPI and other sensors may improve the cavity motion, 
    :: in terms of what DOFs and loop's worth of control drive at which frequencies -- important for discussions along the lines of "DOF [blah] is dominating the control signal, and the actuator cross-coupling for M1 drive of DOF [blah] to M3 optic DOF [blorp] is large, so let's reduce the DOF [blah] drive," and
    :: in terms of whether/where implementing ISI GS13 estimator feedforward will improve things.

To understand how much of the damping loop *error* signal is composed of ISC *control* signal, I look compare the 
    - the ISC control signal,
    - the DAMP *control* signal, against the
    - the MASTER total control request,
all calibrated to the same point in the control system -- where the control output is summed and in the OSEM basis; just down-stream of the EUL2OSEM matrix, and just upstream of the COILOUTF filters which compensate for the coil driver frequency response (uninteresting for this study).

Pitch -- the T1T2T3 actuators
    (3) Attachment 3 Pitch Noise Comparison excerpt from Oli's LHO:86149. These are times when the IMC was LOCKED, so there should be ISC control. But, see the expected factors of 2x-to3x improvement in the OSEM noise below ~5 Hz. So, maybe the ISC control is so low in bandwidth that its affect isn't impacting this study. But, we can see that there's clearly some other loop suppression that has not been accounted for, so maybe it *is* high bandwidth? Let's find out.
    (1) Attachment 1 Comparison of ISC pitch, DAMP pitch, as well as the other DAMP DOFs that use the T1, T2, and T3 actuators -- Vertical and Roll -- control signals.
    Here, we can clearly see that the damping loops are dominating the T2 (and thus T3) control signal above ~ 0.5 Hz, or conversely, the IMC WFS DC coupled control is dominating below 0.5 Hz.
    (2) Attachment 2 shows that the T2 and T3 sensors receive identical request (mostly an out-of-phase combination of Pitch and Roll damping request, as expected from the EUL2OSEM matrix), and T1 drives mostly Roll damping request. The vertical drive request is subdominant at all frequencies.
    (3) Attachment 4 shows the open loop gain and loop suppression TF magnitudes for pitch. The loop suppression here looks very much like the inverse of the shape of the ASD left in the pitch regression, making me worried that Oli's automated regime for removing the loop suppression isn't perfect... I'll ask.

Yaw -- the LFRT actuators
    (7) Attachment 7 The before vs. after comparison of OSEM noise
    (5) Attachment 5 Similar comparison of ISC vs. relevant DAMP control -- showing IMC WFS control dominating only below ~0.2 Hz.
    (6) Attachment 6 As expected from the EUL2OSEM matrix, the LF and RT actuators receive the same control.
    (8) Attachment 8 Shows the open loop gain and loop suppression TF magnitudes for the Yaw damping loop.

"[...] Attachment 4 shows the open loop gain and loop suppression TF magnitudes for pitch. The loop suppression here looks very much like the inverse of the shape of the ASD left in the pitch regression, making me worried that Oli's automated regime for removing the loop suppression isn't perfect... I'll ask.

Followed up wth Oli on this, and indeed there was a bug in the application of the loop suppression -- a blind python "dir" of the optic's directory for exported loop suppression text files returned the list of files alphabetically (L,P,R,T,V,Y) rather than in the canonical order of (L,T,V,R,P,Y) so that means the P suppression was taken out of the T ASD, etc. 

They've fixed that now (and added the loop suppression itself to the ASD plot as a visual aide) -- here's a sample of the improved MC1 P and Y, before vs. after plot.

Changing ETMX bias

Today, Sheila and I decided to increase the ETMX ESD bias voltage. We would like to operate at a higher bias for a short period to see if the extra actuation range allows us to survive the ETMX glitch locklosses. However, we also wanted to understand what effect this has on our range.

Sheila made small steps to increase the ETMX bias voltage and adjusted the L3 drivealign gain accordingly. After every step, I measured the DARM open loop gain and we adjusted the drivealign gain further to maintain the DARM UGF. Once we doubled the voltage, we further adjusted the drivealign gain to bring kappa TST to one. It's important to note that we saw that the correction factor required to maintain the UGF (at 70 Hz) was slightly different than the correction factor required to bring kappa TST back to 1 (measured at 17.6 Hz).

We took a PCAL broadband measurement at the regular and double bias configurations (documented here). Even with kappa TST near 1, there was a small frequency-dependent difference between the two measurements.

Sheila then took us back and forth from the double bias to regular bias states so we could get some noise comparison times to determine if the noise is worse with double bias.

Times in UTC	Start	End
double bias	17:41:58	18:03:37
single bias	18:08:20	18:17:30
double bias	18:18:37	18:26:37
single bias	18:27:40	18:35:40

I exported the PCAL broadband injections and used them to calibration GDS strain for the four times above into PCAL meters. The noise from 15-400 Hz looks to be the same for each time, so I don't think there will be a significant impact to the sensitivity if we double the bias.

I ran a linear regression fit on the voltage and drivealign data from our steps, using this document as reference. I was able to fit alpha - gamma (slope) and the beta values (y-intercept). I calculate alpha - gamma = 9.14e-10 N/V^2 and beta - beta2 = -4.08e-8 N/V

We are planning to go to this double bias for some time to see if reduces the number of ETMX glitch locklosses.