Mon Aug 04 10:07:01 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 6min 57secs
Note that, similar to yesterday, TC-B does not saturate at -200C. Perhaps due to lower OAT (24C, 76F).
FAMIS26054
The script reported ITMY_ST1_CPSINF_H3 is high. This was the same as last time this was ran (alog85969).
TITLE: 08/04 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 148Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 14mph Gusts, 8mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.07 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Locked for 6.5 hours after an earthquake took us out 10 hours ago. The DARM FOM is currently not working. Violin modes, most notably ITMY mode 6, are elevated but the DCPD window FOM shows that they are damping.
Something kicked SRM and caused this lockloss. SRM was also kicked 20 seconds earlier, but we were able to recover from that.
TITLE: 08/04 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Earthquake
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY:
H1 was locked for a good 6 hours then had an unknown lockloss.
Relocking was interupted at LOWNOISE_COIL_DRIVERS, due to a 6.2 M earth_quake whcih took H1 to DOWN.
H1 is currently waiting in Earthquake mode.
LOG:
| Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21:34 | SPI | Tony | PCAL Lab | Yes | Testing beam Splitter ratio analysis tools | 22:13 |
We have many peaks below 40 Hz that couple, at least partly, through input beam jitter. Last summer Sam and Genevieve determined that a wide variety of site equipment produced these peaks, including the office area air handler, mini-splits in the CER, and chiller compressors for the main HVAC (LIGO-G2402140). The figure shows that there is coherence between DARM and the IMC WFS that might be used to clean these low frequency peaks, but that they are currently not being cleaned.
Eventually, we would rather not have peaks that need cleaning, but instead, reduce the source vibration and/or the vibration coupling to DARM. I think that the best plan is to reduce the source vibration of the largest peaks, but to mainly focus on reducing the coupling, because many of these peaks are just 2-5 times the vibration background at the coupling sites, so even eliminating the vibration of the sources will not be enough to get us to our design sensitivity.
The coupling of relatively low amplitude vibrations at low frequencies seems to be associated with coupling resonances. For example, when one of the frequencies of the office area air handler drifted into the 35Hz peak frequency of one of these coupling resonances, the peak in DARM was huge, but was greatly reduced by changing the operation frequency of the air handler (82986). Ill try to map out these low frequency coupling resonances during commissioning periods as a step in understanding their cause. But for now, it would be nice to see how much we can reduce the peaks with cleaning.
The nonsens training for the cleaning is set to clean over the band from 20 Hz to 8 kHz. However, the most appreciable cleaning occurs above 100 Hz. I have attached two plots from the recent training Matt and I ran. The first compares the strain before and after the code runs an offline cleaning of the data. Even in the offline cleaning, it does not perform any subtraction below 60 Hz. The contributions plot shows that the code measures a contribution from IMC WFS A pitch and yaw that is approximately 2 orders of magnitude below the strain.
Similarly, the noise budget injections usually indicate a very low jitter coupling below 60 Hz. This plot is the jitter subbudget showing pitch and yaw contributions. I removed the "total H1" line, since it's currently incorrect. However, this plot only shows contributions from IMC WFS A, and jitter is measured using the IMC PZT, which may only allow us to capture one gouy phase.
All of this is to say, despite this coherence, the nonsens algorithm doesn't find anything to subtract at low frequency. Our noise budget also doesn't show significant coupling here.
Adding: Robert and I think it may be a resolution issue. The noise budget resolution is quite broad at 0.3 Hz, so that may be why those peaks are not captured in the injection. I'm not sure how to address or test the nonsens cleaning resolution.
I have iterated through many different parameters in the nonsens algorithm, including length of time, frequency resolution, number of second order sections, maximum permitted Q value, training method, and frequency band. I am unable to achieve subtraction that is comparable to the measured coherence of these lines. At best, I have achieved 40% reduction of two of the many lines. At best I can achieve 10% reduction of some of the broadband noise. Since I am training offline, I don't expect this to be the result of some funny phase delay between the models. I'm not sure why cleaning these features isn't possible.
TITLE: 08/03 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 152Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 14mph Gusts, 9mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.07 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
H1 has been locked for 2 Hours and 20 minutes.
All systems seem to be functioning well.
Hoping for a smooth shift of Observing.
TITLE: 08/03 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 155Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY: Currently Observing at 155Mpc and have been Locked for a little over 2 hours. One lockloss today and after some issues with ALS not wanting to stay locked (partially due to ground motion, partially unknown), after an initial alignment we were able to relock fine. We dropped out of Observing once due to the squeezer unlocking but it was able to fix itself.
LOG:
18:05 Lockloss
- Lockloss from PRMI/DRMI multiple times due to ALSX or Y unlocking
- Ran an initial alignment
21:19 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
21:21 Observing
22:10 Out of Observing due to SQZer unlock
22:15 Back into Observing
Lockloss at 2025-08-03 18:05UTC after over 7.5 hour locked
21:21 UTC Back to Observing
Sun Aug 03 10:08:00 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 7min 56secs
After LLO dropped out, Jenne gave the OK to try to get squeezing back. The FC took a handful of minutes of trying and failing but then just worked. I used <a href="https://cdswiki.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/wiki/ObservationWithOrWithoutSqueezing">Ryan S's script</a> to get us back to being able to observe with sqz and we are back to Observing.
Out of Observing from 1539-1546UTC.
TITLE: 08/03 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 130Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Corey
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 9mph Gusts, 3mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.06 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: The IFO is still in Observing without squeezing as Corey had left it. I'll give a squeezer a call as soon as I can organize my already impromptu morning.
Looks like H1 went down due to an EQ (probably M6.8 Russia EQ) 4+hrs ago, and was at NLN but having SQZ Issues:
Frustration NOTES:
TITLE: 08/03 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY:
H1 has reached 24 Hours of continuous lock!
All systems lookin good.
No issues all night.
Passing Corey a locked IFO for his OWL shift.
LOG:
| Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 00:00 | SPI | Tony | PCAL Lab | Yes | Testing slides | 00:05 |
TITLE: 08/02 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 152Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 16mph Gusts, 10mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.04 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.06 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
H1 has been Locked for 19 Hours now with decent range.
No issues to report.
TITLE: 08/02 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 154Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY:We are Observing at 149 Mpc and have been Locked for almost 19 hours. Besides the calibration measurement today, we've been Observing the rest of my shift.
LOG:
14:30UTC Observing and have been Locked for 9:44 hours
14:30 Earthquake mode activated
15:25 Back to CALM
18:18 Earthquake mode
18:31 Left Observing to run calibration suite
18:31 NLN_CAL_MEAS
19:03 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
19:03 Observing
20:25 Superevent S250802dn
On July 22nd, Fil swapped the satamps for MC1, MC3, ETMY M0/R0, and TMSY (85922). Here are the differences in the noise performance for each before and after the swap.
Finding times where ISC control wasn't on and the chambers were in nominal states (not earthquake or maintenance) was hard to do because of all the earthquakes we've been having. ETMY M0 and R0 both were hard to find good times for, so a couple of times chosen are not the best showcase of the new noise floor. For example, ETMY M0 L 'after' still has a lot of lower frequency noise that I wasn't able to regress out, and ETMY R0 L, T, and V 'after' also all clearly all have excess low frequency noise remaining due to an earthquake going through at the time. I think you can still generally get an idea of how much better the noise is though. I can run them again when we get a better comparison time.
MC1
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC1_M1_NoiseComparison_1437192600vs1437240215-1200.pdf
r12495
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC1_M1_1437192600_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC1/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC1_M1_1437240215_1200.mat
r12495
MC3
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSMC3_M1_NoiseComparison_1437115850vs1437282002-1200.pdf
r12496
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC3_M1_1437115850_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HSTS/H1/MC3/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSMC3_M1_1437282002_1200.mat
r12496
TMSY
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSY/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSTMSY_M1_NoiseComparison_1437213557vs1437257352-1200.pdf
r12497
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSY/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSTMSY_M1_1437213557_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/TMTS/H1/TMSY/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSTMSY_M1_1437257352_1200.mat
r12497
ETMY
M0
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_M0_NoiseComparison_1436521059vs1437280243-1200.pdf
r12498
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_M0_1436521059_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGM0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_M0_1437280243_1200.mat
r12498
R0
Results:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSETMY_R0_NoiseComparison_1435436097vs1437438025-1200.pdf
r12499
Data:
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_R0_1435436097_1200.mat
/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/QUAD/H1/ETMY/SAGR0/Data/dampRegress_H1SUSETMY_R0_1437438025_1200.mat
r12499
This set of measurements was taken 13 hours into a lock so we were well thermalized.
Report generated and can be found at /ligo/groups/cal/H1/reports/20250802T183908Z/H1_calibration_report_20250802T183908Z.pdf
Broadband
start: 18:32:06 UTC (1438194744)
end: 18:37:24 UTC (1438195062)
output: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250802T183213Z.xml
Simulines
start: 18:39:07 UTC (1438195165)
end: 19:02:14 UTC (1438196552)
output:
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250802T183908Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20250802T183908Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250802T183908Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250802T183908Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250802T183908Z.hdf5
Sat Aug 02 10:09:10 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 9min 6secs
