aLIGO LHO Logbook

LHO General - Ops Day Shift End

thomas.shaffer@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 16:30:55 -0700

Author: thomas.shaffer@ligo.org

Report ID: 86360

TITLE: 08/14 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 13 hours. We had calibration and comissioning this morning, where we rode through a few earthquakes with help from some new configuration (alog86364). Ryan S noticed ITMX mode 2 has been growing slowly for this entire lock. It was never damped because it was almost non existant at the start of the lock. He will address it when practical.
LOG:

1023 GRB E589922
1530 Out of observing for calibration and commissioning
1635 Earthquake mode activated
1706 High ASC gain turned on to test during earthquake
1740 Transitioned ASC back
1906 Observing

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
18:49	LASER	LVEA is LASER HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA IS LASER HAZARD	09:49
19:22	SPI	Jeff	Opt Lab	yes	Inventory	19:25

LHO General - Ops Eve Shift Start

ryan.short@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 16:24:50 -0700

Author: ryan.short@ligo.org

Report ID: 86371

TITLE: 08/14 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: TJ
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 25mph Gusts, 16mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.12 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: H1 has been locked for 12.5 hours and observing since commissioning wrapped up this morning.

Wind moderate with gusts over 20mph, other ground motion low
All other systems nominal

I noticed the ~500Hz violin mode peak is high in DARM and saw that indeed ITMX mode 2 is elevated and has been growing this entire lock stretch. It looks like the gain was never turned on for this mode, which happens if the monitor for a mode is low enough when the full power damping is turned on. Since the violin damping Guardian sees the mode is growing, it's constantly zeroing the gain in the damping filters, so we've been unable to turn on the nominal gain of -15. To fix this, we would have to take H1 out of observing, take the VIOLIN_DAMPING node to 'DAMPING_ON_SIMPLE', then back to 'DAMP_VILINS_FULL_POWER' so that the node resets its "node growing" checks and sees the mode needs damping. I plan to do this if either L1 drops out of observing or if the 500Hz peak on DARM gets up to 10^-16 m/Hz^-1/2

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - Updates to LSC feedforward

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 15:29:19 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 86370

I ran a bruco yesterday that showed lots of low-ish broadband coherence of SRCL, PRCL and MICH.

I have a previous good measurement of the PRCL coupling, so I used that to iteratively fit an improved feedforward. Based on the last test I did of the PRCL feedforward, I am not certain that just adjusting the gain is good enough right now to reduce the coupling significantly. screenshot

I also measured and tried to fit a better SRCL feedforward. The challenge continues to be fitting the low and high frequency behaviors of the SRCL coupling simultaneously. The misfit of the high frequency behavior continues to create a broad bump of SRCL noise around 100-300 Hz.

I made some small improvements of the SRCL coupling, but there is still room for more improvement. screenshot

I still need to remeasure and refit the MICH feedforward.

The new SRCL FF is in FM6 and the PRCL FF is in FM8. I updated the guardian and the SDF.

Images attached to this report

H1 SEI - Comment to Good test of the high asc gain earthquake state this morning

jenne.driggers@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 15:22:52 -0700

Author: jenne.driggers@ligo.org

Report ID: 86369

It's been remarkable and wonderful to see how well we've been surviving earthquakes lately!

This is such a big win, that I suggest we not worry too much about if this pops us out of Observing. If we're able to automate saving the lock, and then going back to Observe when the ground motion is compatible with our usual loops, that's already a huge leap forward on improving our duty cycle.

H1 SUS - 8/12 Estimator Test Filter Installation Issue Addressed, Corresponding New Fits Added to SVN

ivey.zhong@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 14:24:28 -0700

Author: ivey.zhong@ligo.org

Report ID: 86366

Edgard, Ivey

This Tuesday Oli ran into issues installing the new blend filters and new SR3 Yaw transfer function fits for the OSEM estimator (see LHO: 86319). An error from the cplxpair function, which pairs complex conjugates, appeared only when converting the fit from zpk into state space. Somehow, this would introduce a small but significant difference between any two complex pairs, which would cause the computer to reject it as a complex pair. To resolve this issue, we ran a function to average each complex pair. We tested it with our mock PR3 model in the lab, and this seemed to fix the error cplxpair was encountering.

We were not able to reproduce the error that Oli noticed with the blend filters in our lab, but we will look more into this, and hopefully the issue will be fixed by next Tuesday when Oli tests the estimator again with the new fits.

The new cleaned SR3 yaw fits were added to SusSVN and can be found here '~/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/Common/FilterDesign/Estimator/fits_H1SR3_Y_2025-08-05.mat'. More on the fits LHO: 86233.

The new blend filter with updated fits can be found here '~/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/Common/FilterDesign/Estimator/Estimator_blend_skinnynotch_SR3yaw_20250723.mat'. More on the blend filter LHO: 86265.

SEI, SUS

H1 AOS - DQ Shift August 4-10

riley.mcneil@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 13:05:38 -0700

Author: riley.mcneil@ligo.org

Report ID: 86368

DQ shifters: Riley McNeil and Emil Lofquist-Fabris

Daily observing duty cycle: 57.05%, 67.36%. 99.68%, 59.91%, 91:23%, 69.16%, 100.00%. Week average: 77.77%.
The BNS range this week sat around 150 Mpc, however there were a few sudden drops in the range by about 5-10 Mpc. These were seen on Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday.
There were several issues with the squeezer this week that resulted in sudden increases in noise and glitching, as well as a couple drops from observing.
There was a recurring spike in the y-manifold beam tube motion [X] at 17:00 every day. This was seen in the previous week as well, this is caused by the daily dewar fill noise at the Y-manifold cryopump. (alog)
There was also recurring noise from ~11:00-14:00 in several corner station accelerometers also seen in previous shifts.
Just above 20 Hz (~22-25 Hz) there has been a line of glitching that we believe to be light scattering. This has been seen since at least the start of July 2025.
- There has also been a lot of glitching/noise from ~20-40 Hz, consistent with previous weeks, likely from an AC unit housed inside the VPW. (alog)
There was a 34 hour lock segment this week, from Tuesday August 5th 22:19 to August 7th 08:31.
- The detector also spent all of Sunday observing as well.

See full report here: https://wiki.ligo.org/DetChar/DataQuality/DQShiftLHO20250804

DetChar

H1 SQZ - Comment to Mid SQZ Data for 5kHz HOM Spacing with ZM4 Yaw alignment changes

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 13:03:55 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 86363

Sheila, Elenna, Camilla

Tested if SQZ was any better with the higher NLG, see attached, it wasn't although we did have good ASQZ of 19dB. We will revert OPO setpoint to 80uW

Type	Time (UTC)	Angle	DTT Ref	SQZ
No SQZ	16:37:00 - 16:57:00	N/A	ref 0
ASQZ NLG 37	17:43:30-17:46:30	(-)81	ref 1, 10	19dB
SQZ NLG 37	17:51:00-17:54:00	(-)141	ref 2, 11	-4.5dB

Took more 5kHz/10kHz data with the NLG at 37 (effects of HOM easier to see). DTT saved as /ligo/home/camilla.compton/Documents/sqz/templates/dtt/20250814higher_order_modes.xml

In the first set of data, Elenna added an offset to DHARD, we didn't see a change at 5kHz but there was a change at 10kHz that was debatably repeatable.

In the second set of data, Sheila added an offset to SRCL1, we saw a big change at 5kHz but no change at 10kHz, see attached at 5kHz and 10kHz.

Type	Time (UTC)	Angle	DTT Ref	Notes
No SQZ	16:37:00 - 16:57:00	N/A	ref 0
ASQZ NLG 37	17:43:30-17:46:30	(-)81	ref 1, 10
SQZ NLG 37	17:51:00-17:54:00	(-)141	ref 2, 11
Mid SQZ	18:00:30 - 18:02:30	(-)118	ref 12
Mid SQZ +4cts DHARD PIT	18:06:30 - 18:08:30	(-)118	ref 13	Difference only at 10k? Repeat
Mid SQZ	18:09:30 - 18:11:30	(-)118	ref 14
Mid SQZ +4cts DHARD PIT	18:12:30 - 18:14:30	(-)118	ref 15
Mid SQZ -4cts DHARD PIT	18:15:45- 18:17:45	(-)118	ref 16
Mid SQZ +4cts DHARD YAW	18:19:30 - 18:21:30	(-)118	ref 17	No difference seen
Mid SQZ SRM YAW 1urad (offset 0.3)	18:28:00 - 18:30:00	(-)120	ref 18	Big difference at 5kHz, none at 10kHz
Mid SQZ SRM YAW -1urad (offset -0.3)	18:33:30 - 18:35:50	(-)114	ref 19	Got better
Mid SQZ SRM YAW -2urad (offset -0.6)	18:41:30 - 18:43:30	(-)108	ref 20	Overshot, got worse, mode didn't flip
Mid SQZ SRM YAW -1.5urad (offset -0.45)	18:46:30 - 18:48:30	(-)108	ref 21
Mid SQZ	18:52:00 - 18:52:00	(-)118	ref 22	Back to nominal

Took OPO setpoint back to 80uW and remeasured NLG to be 22.4. It is interesting that before the SQZT0 pump alignment 86323 we had much worse NLG even with the same OPO trans setpoint and spot on the crystal. This doesn't make sense to us.

OPO Setpoint	Amplified Max	Amplified Min	UnAmp	Dark	NLG	Note
80	0.153078	0.002067	0.0068192	-1.16e-5	22.4	With Optimizing Temp

Images attached to this report

H1 SQZ - Comment to Removed NO_SQUEEZING Requests from ISC_LOCK and Added

thomas.shaffer@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 12:09:35 -0700

Author: thomas.shaffer@ligo.org

Report ID: 86367

We loaded this and tested going to and from ISC_LOCK's Inject_Squeezing state with the SQZ manager in No_Squeezing and FREQ_DEP_SQZ. All worked well.

If we ever need to go to observing without squeezing, we should keep this in mind as I'm not 100% confident we won't get some manager confusion depending on when we do the transition. We'll cross that bridge when we get to it though.

OpsInfo

H1 AOS - Comment to SQZT7 Beam Profiling with different ZM4 and ZM5 PSAMS Settings

leendert.schrader@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 12:01:12 -0700

Author: leendert.schrader@ligo.org

Report ID: 86365

Leo, Jennie W., Camilla The attached pdf contains all the beam q parameters fitted to the collected beam width data. Only the 13.5% data was fitted, as the D4S data was too inconsistent to obtain confident q values. Fitting was performed with the a la mode beamPath.fitBeamWidth function. The attached q parameters were individually plotted using a la mode and verified for their data-fitting accuracy. As mentioned in the document, all q parameters are located immediately after the interaction with ZM5 (through the view of BM4 -> ZM4 -> ZM5 beam travel).

Non-image files attached to this report

SQZT7_qParams_at_ZM5.pdf

H1 SEI - Good test of the high asc gain earthquake state this morning

jim.warner@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 11:46:36 -0700

Author: jim.warner@ligo.org

Report ID: 86364

This morning a 6.2 magnitude earthquake near Vanuatu happened during the commissioning window, so we tested the asc gain reversion scripts Elenna came up with in this alog. It took a little longer than I would have liked to get the scripts working, so we didn't actually transition until basically the peak ground velocities, but the transition went pretty smoothly. I think this eq is tied for the biggest we stayed locked through for all of O4.

Attached image shows ground velocities on the top row (both peakmon and the ITMY Z STS 30-100mhz blrms, second row is the ISC_LOCK state, third and fourth show channels related to the asc transition. Fourth row is the first gain changed by the script CHARD Y, the third row is the SRCL FF gain, which is the last thing changed in the script. The dashed white vertical lines on the CHARD trace and the top row ground traces show the time the transition took to complete.

Even if the transition was a little late I think that this test likely still saved the lock, I have often seen on eqs like this that the IFO stays locked through the peak ground motion, but loses lock some time shortly after, while the eq is still ringing down.

There is still a lot of work to be done as the transition is currently handled by a couple of scripts on the ISI_CONFIG overview medm and the transition will knock us out of Observe, still unclear what the best way to automate this would be, but still a pretty good test.

ISC

Images attached to this report

LHO VE - Thu CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 10:46:17 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86362

Thu Aug 14 10:08:28 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 8min 24secs

Images attached to this report

H1 SQZ - Mid SQZ Data for 5kHz HOM Spacing with ZM4 Yaw alignment changes

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 10:08:34 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 86361

Sheila, Camilla

We saved H1:OMC-DCPD_524K_A2_IN1 data with the PD sum after Sheila changed the matrix as in 85937. DTT saved as /ligo/home/camilla.compton/Documents/sqz/templates/dtt/20250814higher_order_modes.xml screenshot attached.

Interestingly we could reduce the size of the 5kHz modes by changing ZM4 YAW alignment, at the nominal alignment and the alignment that reduced the 5kHz modes most, we also took mean sqz data, the nominal alignment had a slightly better mean SQZ.

Starting angle is (-)133, took SQZ_ANG SERVO to DOWN. After each step of ZM, we changed SQZ angle to get level back to 4dB ASQZ, as our 5kHz modes look clearest here.

To get mean sqz, pause SQZ_MANAGER, SQZ_LO_LR to DOWN and ADF off. Should have misaligned the FC but we didn't.

Type	Time (UTC)	Angle	DTT Ref	Notes
SQZ	15:54:00 - 15:59:00	(-)133	ref 0	While taking CAL measurements
FDS Mid - SQZ	16:01:30 - 16:04:00	(-)105	ref 1
FDS Mid SQZ, -50urad pit +3deg	16:07:30 - 16:09:30	(-)109	ref 2
FDS Mid - SQZ	16:10:30- 16:12:30	(-)111	ref 3	Redid at 4dB ASQZ
FDS Mid SQZ, -50urad yaw	16:14:30 - 16:16:30	(-)114	ref 4
FDS Mid SQZ, +50urad yaw	16:17:45 - 16:19:45	(-)109	ref 5
FDS Mid SQZ, +100urad yaw	16:21:30 - 16:23:30	(-)106	ref 6
FDS Mean SQZ, +100urad yaw	16:26:00 - 16:28:00	N/A	ref 7
FDS Mean SQZ,	16:29:00 - 16:31:00	N/A	ref 8
No SQZ	16:37:00 - 16:57:00	N/A	ref 9	took 1500 avg (~10mins)

Took above data at NLG of 16.4, checked the NLG 76542, it's a lot better since we adjusted the pump alignment on Tuesday 86323. Then increased NLG to 37 to see if this will improve SQZ.

OPO Setpoint	Amplified Max	Amplified Min	UnAmp	Dark	NLG	Note
80	0.1121155	0.001849	0.0068192	-1.16e-5	16.4	Without Optimizing Temp
90	0.257827	0.001813			37.7

Images attached to this report

H1 CAL - Calibration Sweep 1530 UTC

thomas.shaffer@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 09:18:11 -0700

Author: thomas.shaffer@ligo.org

Report ID: 86359

Running another calibration measurement today following the usual broadband and simulines.

Simulines Start:

PDT: 2025-08-14 08:36:33.095985 PDT
UTC: 2025-08-14 15:36:33.095985 UTC
GPS: 1439221011.095985

Simulines End:

PDT: 2025-08-14 08:59:53.303431 PDT
UTC: 2025-08-14 15:59:53.303431 UTC
GPS: 1439222411.303431

Files:

2025-08-14 15:59:53,136 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DAR
MOLG_SS_20250814T153633Z.hdf5
2025-08-14 15:59:53,145 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/
PCALY2DARM_SS_20250814T153633Z.hdf5
2025-08-14 15:59:53,150 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/
SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250814T153633Z.hdf5
2025-08-14 15:59:53,156 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/
SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250814T153633Z.hdf5
2025-08-14 15:59:53,161 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/
SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250814T153633Z.hdf5

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

H1_calibration_report_20250814T153633Z.pdf

LHO General - Ops Day Shift Start

thomas.shaffer@ligo.org — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 07:38:06 -0700

Author: thomas.shaffer@ligo.org

Report ID: 86358

TITLE: 08/14 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 2mph Gusts, 0mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.10 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Observing for 4 hours, automated relock. Environment is calm. The only active alarm is the known vacuum PT242B pressure. Planned calibration and commissioning time today 1530-1930 UTC.

LHO General - Ops Eve Shift Summary

ryan.short@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 22:03:00 -0700

Author: ryan.short@ligo.org

Report ID: 86357

TITLE: 08/14 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY: Very quiet shift with H1 observing throughout, despite a couple hours of high winds blowing through with gusts briefly over 40mph. There's a M5.6 quake inbound from the South Pacific, but the EQ response tool just places it in the lower bound of the "earthquake" region. H1 has now been locked for 14.5 hours.

X1 SEI - SPI In-vac SuK Fiber Collimator Beam Profile Before vs. After Bake

jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:50:14 -0700

Author: jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org

Report ID: 86350

J. Kissel Recall the SPI pathfinder is pathfinding more than just the future fully assembled sensor array's roll in improving seismic isolation, but also -- at a low-level -- pathfinding some new individual types optomechanical components for LIGO. This aLOG covers the latest in the path for the Schaefter + Kirchhoff (SuK) fiber collimators. The first of SPI's Schaefter + Kirchhoff (SuK) fiber collimators (DCC:S0272502, ICS:S0272502) is now Class B clean after having gone through one round of massaging with isopropyl alcohol and air-baking (see CNB:2187), at the planned time and levels for the future Class-A vacuum-bake (peak temp 85 [deg C]; ramp up 6 hours, hold for 48 hours, ramp down for 6 hours). The first open question was "will the lens remain intact and undamaged through the bake." the definitive answer: YES -- the lens remained whole and, at least visually, without defect. While I didn't use a optical fiber microscope, the lens appears very much intact with no obvious cracks or glinting. See the attached Visual Inspection. Next up was to check it's optical performance as (hopefully) a more quantitative measure of performance change (hopefully not peformance degradation). Prior to the bake, I'd set the lens position on the collimator to achieve some level of collimation, and characterized the beam profile -- see LHO:84825. After the bake, I used the same characterization setup -- augmented only to keep the now Class-B fiber collimator clean (see LHO:86299) -- to remeasure the beam profile to see if the collimator still projected the same beam quantitatively. The beam remains as I had collimated it, with the waist within 100 [cm] of the prebake position. I did *not* adjust the tuned "before" pre-bake lens position at all prior to taking the "after" data. Check out the 2025-08-07_spifc_S0272502_beamprofile_fit.pdf attachment. - First page compares the two data sets, X axis (parallel to the optical table surface plane) on the top panel, and Y-axis (perpendicular to the optical table plane) on the bottom panel. You can see that the change in waist position / size is Using Delta = (2025-08-06)' - (2025-06-03), and % Diff = [(2025-08-06)' - (2025-06-03)]/(2025-06-03) z0x' - z0x = +0.0544 [m] (+4% difference) z0y' - z0y = -0.1103 [m] (-8% difference) w0x' - w0x = -12.14 [um] (1.3% difference) w0y' - w0y = -10.17 [um] (1.1% difference) Excellent. Because the X waist position moved in +Z, and the Y waist position moved in -Z, the beam has become a bit more astigmatic. This is evident in the "Far Field" projection of the model on pages 3 and 5. But, given that the measurement setup is limited with the furthest data point being z(meas_max) - z0 ~ 5.41 [m] - 1.4 [m] ~ 4.0 [m] away from the waist, I wouldn't claim that the measurements perfectly constrain the far-field behavior. Recall we *want* the waist to be at z=0, at the fiber collimator and this collimator's lens position was *not* tuned to that simply because of user error. I'm fully confident I *can* set the lens position such that the waist *is* at the fiber collimator, and after doing so the 5.41 [m] NanoScan position will get a bit more "in to" the far field, which will hopefully better constrain the model, and thus get a better handle on how astigmatic the beam gets after baking (or even *if* it gets consistently astigmatic). If we define the dimensionless astigmatism parameter, A, as the (zRx - zRy) difference in Rayleigh range, divided by the (zRx + zRy) sum (with the Rayleigh range defined by the fit waist, zR = pi * w0^2 / lambda), then the change (% Difference) in astigmatism is only 2025-06-03 A = +2.3983 2025-08-06 A' = +2.3409 (A' - A)/A = 0.02494 = 2.5% which seems totally tolerable from pre- to post-bake. Regardless, for the remaining to collimators that we've yet to bake, we'll be setting the collimation (lens position) post-bake anyways, so how it changes across a bake is moot. Whether the absolute value of A ~ +2.35 is tolerable an open question, that we'll work to answer in the mean time. Pages 2 and 4 show the model zoomed in to the data between z = 0 and 6 [m]. Here you can also see that the fit doesn't *perfectly* match the data their either, so there's another systematic grain of salt to take with the assessment of change. Minor note: I was not consistent with the orientation of the collimator w.r.t. to the optical table surface; I oriented the collimator 90-deg from the 2025-06-03 vs 2025-08-06 data (because I found out / rediscovered that the 2025-08-06 position is how you align the p-pol transmission with the optical table; see Figure 5 of T2400413). I've flip-flopped the X and Y axes data for the waist size in the 2025-06-03 data to account for this (which is why the careful reader would notice a difference between this entry's version of the 2025-06-03 results from that in LHO:86342). But -- all in all -- this looks good enough! I've taken these results to indicate that we can move forward with the full Class-A clean-and-bake. All three collimators, (S0272502, S0272503, S0272504) in the queue now -- see CNB:2243.ISC

Non-image files attached to this report

2025-08-06_SuKFiberCollimator_VisualInspection.pdf

2025-08-07_spifc_S0272502_beamprofile_fit.pdf

spifc_beamprofile_S0272502_postclassBbake_20250807.m

H1 SQZ - Removed NO_SQUEEZING Requests from ISC_LOCK and Added "ignore_SQZ" Flag

ryan.short@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:45:30 -0700

Author: ryan.short@ligo.org

Report ID: 86356

In consultation with Sheila, I've added a new flag in lscparams.py called "ignore_sqz" (currently set to False) which when True, removes SQZ_MANAGER from ISC_LOCK's managed nodes list and sets up ISC_LOCK such that no requests are made of SQZ_MANAGER. I've additionally removed all instances of ISC_LOCK requesting SQZ_MANAGER to 'NO_SQUEEZING.'

The motivation for this stems from an issue encountered earlier this week (alluded to in Monday's shift summary) where after H1 dropped observing from the SQZ PMC having to relock, SQZ_MANAGER eventually stalled (which is not unexpected) and ISC_LOCK then requested it to 'NO_SQUEEZING' for a then-not-well-understood reason. After looking into the frequently used "unstall nodes" decorator in ISC_LOCK, I learned that the revive function it calls simply requests the stalled subordinate node to whatever its last requested state was. The catch here is that the last requested state refers only to what the manager's last request was to the subordinate, not whatever request a user, other node, or standalone script may have made, as the manager node has no way of knowing about requests outside of its own. A discrepancy between a manager node's last request to a subordinate and a different request to that subordinate can be seen with a notification on the manager saying the subordinate's request changed.

My understanding of the sequence of events that led to the confusion on Monday is that commissioners had been working with the squeezer and wanted its Guardian manager node to remain in 'NO_SQUEEZING' while H1 was relocking following their work. In its design at the time, in a few different states such as 'INJECT_SQUEEZING', ISC_LOCK would check the status of SQZ_MANAGER, and if it was in 'NO_SQUEEZING', move on with the state and re-request SQZ_MANAGER to 'NO_SQUEEZING'. This makes SQZ_MANAGER's manager's last request 'NO_SQUEEZING', so when SQZ_MANAGER later stalled, it was requested back to 'NO_SQUEEZING' even though a user had set SQZ_MANAGER to its nominal state sometime later. This is why I've removed requests to 'NO_SQUEEZING' in ISC_LOCK; I believe it's a sound assumption that if SQZ_MANAGER is in 'NO_SQUEEZING', someone wants it there and Guardian should just move on. Further, this makes it so that the only request ISC_LOCK ever makes to SQZ_MANAGER is its nominal state (except in 'DOWN', of course, which would then later get updated to the nominal), meaning there should be no confusion as to what its last request was.

Changes have been saved and committed to svn, but ISC_LOCK has not yet been loaded. This should be done at the next drop from observing.

ISC, OpsInfo, SQZ

H1 CAL - Comment to Calibration measurements at three ESD biases

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 16:42:37 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 86354

We are trying to understand how the systematic error is changing at each bias voltage, even though we think we are correcting the drivealign gain to account for the actuation change.

Francisco and I made some plots of how the modeled error changes. First, we pulled the model from the 20250719T225835Z report, since that is our current calibration model. Then, we pulled the kappas at the time of the lowest bias voltage measurement, since that is the bias voltage that our model is based on. We applied the kappas from that measurement time, and then calculated a new response function assuming an additional TST actuation change, ranging from no change (0%) to 1.5% change. Then, we compared each of these response functions to the kappa-corrected model.

To be clear, we are calculating the new response function as:

R = 1/C_model + (error_factor*TST_model + PUM_model + UIM_model) * D_model

The "model" in this case also has the kappa-corrected values applied, which are:

{'c': 0.98335475,
'f_c': 447.65558,
'uim': 1.0052187,
'pum': 1.0012773,
'tst': 1.0183398}

Looking at our results side-by-side with the broadband pcal measurement, we see some similarites. However, it's not exactly the same, since the frequency dependence appears slightly different in the measurement than the model.

There are some other comparisons to be made, but we can start with these. The script I used to make this plot is saved in /ligo/groups/cal/H1/ifo/scripts/compare_models_tst_err.py

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Ops Day Shift End

oli.patane@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 16:38:43 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86355

TITLE: 08/13 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 152Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY: Observing at 151 Mpc and have been Locked for over 9 hours. Nothing really happened today besides the calibration commissioning from earlier.

We don't think it affected anything, but at 20:48 UTC, we had a staff member in a car drive up to the LVEA receiving door, idle there for 5 minutes, and then drive away at 20:53UTC, so I'm tagging detchar in case we see anything weird in the data during that time.
LOG:

14:30UTC Just got to NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
    14:32 Observing
    15:30 Out of Observing for calibration measurements
    15:30 NLN_CAL_MEAS
    16:01 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
    16:12 NLN_CAL_MEAS
    16:43 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
    17:41 NLN_CAL_MEAS
    18:12 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
    18:20 NLN_CAL_MEAS
    18:30 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
    18:31 Observing
    20:48 Staff member in car driving up to receiving and idling
    20:53 Car drove away from receiving

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
	LASER	LVEA is LASER HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA IS LASER HAZARD
16:10	VAC	Travis	MY	n	Checking on pump status	17:16
16:46		Christina, Nichole	MY	n	3IFO inventorying	20:10
17:16	VAC	Travis, Anna	MY	n	Leak checking	18:30
21:02	SPI	Tony	PCAL Lab	y(local)	SPIing	22:32
21:57	FAC	Tyler	MX, EX	n	Inventory	23:27
23:32		Betsy	OpticsLab	n		23:47

DetChar

LHO General - Ops Eve Shift Start

ryan.short@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 16:00:20 -0700

Author: ryan.short@ligo.org

Report ID: 86353

TITLE: 08/13 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 150Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 22mph Gusts, 11mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.05 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.11 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: Windy, smokey, and hot afternoon on site, but so far H1 has been locked for 8.5 hours following commissioning time this morning.

Wind moderate with gusts over 20mph
All other systems nominal

X1 SUS - PSAMS (for HxDS with a Piezo-SAMS payload) assembly and characterization at CIT for O5

rahul.kumar@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 15:44:35 -0700

Author: rahul.kumar@ligo.org

Report ID: 86347

Camille Makarem (CIT), Rahul

Last week at CIT we assembled and tested four units of PSAMS (Piezo-SAMS payload - Piezo-deformable Mirrors for Active Mode Matching). These four fully assembled PSAMS are shown in attachment01 and attachment02 and they will be shipped to LLO for O5 HPDS assembly and installation in HAM6. Given below are the test results of the PSAMS payload - PZT actuation and the desired radius of curvature of the mirror at 100V.

1. Optic E2100053, Type A2, s/n - 02 - PZT voltage tested from 0 to 200V, Pre-load set to 32 in. lbs at 100V DC, RoC = 2.42 m

2. Optic E2100053, Type A1, s/n - 01 - PZT voltage tested from 0 to 200V, Pre-load set to 32 in. lbs at 100V DC, RoC = 5.76 m

3. Optic E2100053, Type B2, s/n - 01 - PZT voltage tested from 0 to 200V, Pre-load set to 30 in. lbs at 100V DC, RoC = 2.41 m

4. Optic E2100053, Type B1, s/n - 03 - PZT voltage tested from 0 to 200V, Pre-load set to 28 in. lbs at 100V DC, RoC = 5.63 m

The Strain gauge readout results will be posted later on.

PSAMS assembly details and issues (faced) are discussed below,

a. Attachment03 shows the PZT with five lead wires. We looked into the vendor data to identify + HV PZT (the side which has been marked with dots) and PZT ground (non dotted side). The other 3 leads belong to the Strain Gauge (SG). We crimped pins to all five leads - as shown in attachment04. The wire pins were then pushed into the 7 pin Glenair might mouse connector (MM 803-003-02M6-7PN-598A) - as shown in attachment05. We also used a PEEK zip tie to secure the wires on the PZT stack. We followed D2000383 for the wiring chain diagram.

b. During the assembly we did not have vendor data to identify the leads for the strain gauge, hence we connected the wires based on the spare units at CIT (which lead to some confusion as the two spare units internal wiring contradicted each other). As per D2000382, the bridge excitation should be connected to pin 1 on the might mouse connector and GND should be at pin 3, strain signal on pin 6. In reality we connected the GND to pin1, strain signal to pin6 and +V bridge excitation to pin 3 (basically pin 1 and pin 3 are inverted). Later (post assembly), Camille acquired the vendor data for identifying the leads for the strain gauge, which is shown here. After discussing this with Jeff Kissel and Daniel, we concluded that this should not affect the working of the SG - however for future assembly we should use the latest vendor data.

c. The PZTs, washers and the deformable mirror were all stacked vertically (as per T2400260) and torqued as per specification - see pictures for reference here - attachment05, attachment06, attachment07, attachment08 and full assembly shown in attachment09.

d. Electrical testing - we followed E2100371 to confirm the electrical connections for the PZT voltage and strain gauge readout - test set up shown in attachment10 and attachment11.

e. RoC measurement on ZYGO interferometer - after successfully testing and confirming the working of the PZT actuation we started measuring the Radius of Curvature (RoC) of the optic on the ZYGO interferometer - see attachment12, attachment13 and attachment14 for details of the setup - fringes observed as shown here, as an example. The final numbers (pre-load and the RoC for each mirror) are posted above.

We wanted to capture few things which we faced during the assembly and testing and this will help for assembling future units. These are listed below,

1. Tangless helicoils for mirror mounting - we used tanged helicoils for mirror mounting, however breaking the tang after the assembly was very unsafe for the mirror. Hence, we had to unmount the mirror from the flexure mirror holder, break the tangs and then re-mount the mirror (which involves heating and cooling them). Hence, we would recommend to use tangless helicoils only.

2. We struggled to attach D1900097 to D1900123 since the threads were bad on D1900097. Don got us a 1''-32 size tap from McMaster to chase the threads, however I could only chase a few of them - enough to assemble four units. The threads on the other 6 units (D1900097) at CIT were extremely difficult to chase hence we included it in our future to-do list of things (might have to be made dirty again for proper chasing).

3. PEEK zip tie for wire lacing inside the PSAMS - the old PSAMS used viton ring to lace the PZT electrical leads, this has now been replaced with PEEK zip tie. We were not very convinced with this, as the viton ring felt easier to use and more secure for the wires.

4. We spent a lot of time trying to understand and interpret the correct wiring diagram - initially Fabrice's FDR and Luis's document contradicted each other. To add to the confusion, the already built unit at CIT (two spare psams, with two different cables and might mouse connections) wiring also contradicted each other. However (long story short), after talking to Fil and Marc at LHO we were able to sort it. We had to change the 18V power supply to the PZT driver D2000555, since the exciting one was faulty. Also, Dean (at CIT) made some quick checks on the PZT driver to confirm that it was healthy. However the most important thing to note over here is as follows - the two spare units at CIT, ZM2 and ZM5 (from the previous build) have wiring diagrams different from the design (I think for ZM2), hence this needs to be checked before future use.

Camille as noted down the serial number of the parts used during this assembly and they are listed here.

SUS

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - DRMI locking histograms Pre & Post ReflAir changes

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 15:05:31 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86349

5 day increments.
I chose 5 days before June 16th because on June 16th there was a ReflAir Phase change, and 5 days later there was another change to ReflAir phasing.
So given a window of 5 days in between 2 changes I chose 5 days before, 5 days between changes, and DRMI after the last change for 5 days.

Images attached to this report

H1 SQZ - ZM4 Strain Gauge Minimum Value Slightly Drifting

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 14:49:40 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 86352

Leo, Camilla

Leo noticed when comparing the data we took in July 85917 to last years OMC scans with different ZM curvature settings 80010, that the minimum value ZM4 can reach has changed. Over ~ an hour or so, the strain gauge can drift around 0.1V, their total ranges are 7.7V so maybe these changes of 0.2/7.7=2.5% are not too surprising.

In September 2024, 0V on ZM4 was a strain gauge of 2.1V. Drifted to 2.05V after 2 hours.
In December 2024, 0V on ZM4 was 2.15V and 0V on ZM5 was -5.40V. 185V was 9.25 on ZM4 and 1.95 on ZM5.
In July 2025, 0V on ZM4 was 2.3V and 0V on ZM5 was -5.45V. 195V was 10 on ZM4 and 2.35 on ZM5

H1 CAL - Comment to Calibration measurements at three ESD biases

francisco.llamas@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 14:25:33 -0700

Author: francisco.llamas@ligo.org

Report ID: 86346

Attaching figures comparing the sensing function, the actuation function, and the open loop gain (olg). All the figures are formatted in the same way, where the left side shows the bode plot from each report and the right shows the bode plot from of each measurement ratio to a reference. I used the latest exported calibration measurement "20250719T225835Z" as a reference. From 10 Hz to 1 kHz the sensing and the actuation function residuals are within 5%. The OLG is within 10% with one outlier at 410 Hz.

Images attached to this report

LHO VE - Comment to BTRP adapter flange and GV installed at MY

anna.iudintseva@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 14:04:18 -0700

Author: anna.iudintseva@ligo.org

Report ID: 86351

Here are the first and the last pictures of the leak detector values. The max was 3.5 * 10-12. 90% of the time it stayed at <1 *10-12.

Images attached to this report

H1 PEM - H1 dust monitor Month-Long Trends FAMIS

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 12:58:56 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 86348

Closes FAMIS37255, last checked in alog85779

Everything looks as expected, LVEA5 is off during observing.

Images attached to this report

H1 PSL - H1 PSL Status Report Weekly FAMIS

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 12:05:57 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 86343

Closes FAMIS26544, last checked in alog86165
Laser Status:
    NPRO output power is 1.86W
    AMP1 output power is 70.07W
    AMP2 output power is 140.6W
    NPRO watchdog is GREEN
    AMP1 watchdog is GREEN
    AMP2 watchdog is GREEN
    PDWD watchdog is GREEN

PMC:
    It has been locked 1 days, 2 hr 21 minutes
    Reflected power = 23.57W
    Transmitted power = 105.3W
    PowerSum = 128.9W

FSS:
It has been locked for 0 days 5 hr and 47 min
TPD[V] = 0.8582V

ISS:
The diffracted power is around 4.1%
Last saturation event was 0 days 5 hours and 48 minutes ago

Possible Issues:
PMC reflected power continues to be high, we can see a drop during the Tuesday incursion work, but it has risen a bit since then.

Images attached to this report

H1 CAL - Calibration measurements at three ESD biases

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 11:50:03 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 86344

Today, we measured the calibration at three different ESD biases. First, we measured at the current bias of 269 V, and then our O4 standard bias of 136 V. Then, I stepped up to a higher bias of 409 V.

ESDAMON value	Bias Offset	L3 Drivealign gain	Calibration report	Notes
269 V	6.0542453	88.28457	alog: 86337 report: 20250813T153848Z	only 1 hour thermalized at measurement time current operating bias
136 V	3.25	198.6643	alog: 86339 report: 20250813T162026Z	nominal O4 bias, calibration model fit at this bias
409 V	8.89	57.587	alog: 86341 report: 20250813T174921Z	ESD saturation warnings while at this bias Took 5 minutes of quiet time, cal lines on, at this new bias start: 18:12:54 UTC end: 18:18:00 UTC

The attached plot compares the three broadband measurements at each ESD bias. It seems like the overall systematic error decreases as we increase the ESD bias.

To step up the ESD bias, I used guardian code that Sheila attached to this alog. Another relevant alog comparing simulines results at different biases is here.

ISC

Images attached to this report

LHO VE - BTRP adapter flange and GV installed at MY

travis.sadecki@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 11:50:01 -0700

Author: travis.sadecki@ligo.org

Report ID: 86345

Similar to alog 86227, the BTRP adapter flange and GV were installed on Tuesday at the MY station. Leak checking was completed today with no signal seen above the ~e-12 torrL/s background of the leak detector.

Pumping on this volume will continue until next Tuesday, so some additional noise may be seen by DetChar. This volume is valved out of the main volume, so the pressure readings from the PT-243 gauges can be ignored until further notice.

DetChar, VE

X1 SEI - Comment to Optical Setup and Results of first tuning of SPI In-vac SuK Fiber Collimator Lens Position

jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 11:40:44 -0700

Author: jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org

Report ID: 86342

I took a moment to revisit the "cross checks" of the fit -- namely why the waist at the Rayleigh range (w(zR)) and Divergence angle's (\theta_{R}) prediction of what the waist should be in the "far field," (w(zEnd)), and solved the "mysteries." (1) For the the prediction of the waist radius at the Rayleigh range: all the above math was correct, it's merely that I did not properly offset the z position w.r.t. where the origin of the plot lie (at the fiber collimator). If I adjust the z position for that offset (zRx,zRy) [from fit w0] = (z0x+zRx, z0y+zRy) [from fiber collimator, i.e. z = 0 [m]] = (1.4017, 1.3469) + (2.3691, 2.4404) [m] = (3.7708, 3.7899) [m] then the waist radius (w0 * sqrt(2)) lands bang-on the fit and measurement. (2) For why the simplistic model of divergence angle doesn't appear to match the divergence of the measurements or model: this is merely a question of what really is "near" and "far" field. Turns out if you just expand the z range what I would call "way" out -- from 6 [m] to 20 [m] -- you see convergence between the two models. The pdf attached here is a new version of the plots showing the same data and model above, but with the simplistic models fixed. I now show two pages, page one with the original zoom from z = 0 to 6 [m] aka the "Near" field demonstrating (1), and page two zoomed out from z = 0 to 20 [m] demonstrating (2). I also attach the updated version of the code, spifc_beamprofile_S0272502_prebake_20250603.m.

Non-image files attached to this report

2025-06-03_spifc_S0272502_prebake_beamprofile_fit.pdf

spifc_beamprofile_S0272502_prebake_20250603.m

H1 CAL - Calibration Measurement August 13, 2025 17:42 UTC

oli.patane@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 11:19:13 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86341

At the time of starting these measurements, we had been Locked for over 3 hours, so we were fully thermalized
CALIBRATION_MONITOR screen and pydarm report are attached

Broadband
2025-08-13 17:42:30 - 17:47:47 UTC
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250813T174237Z.xml

Simulines
2025-08-13 17:48:52 - 18:12:09 UTC
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250813T174853Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20250813T174853Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250813T174853Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250813T174853Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250813T174853Z.hdf5

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

H1_calibration_report_20250813T174853Z.pdf

LHO VE - Wed CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 10:30:08 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86340

Wed Aug 13 10:07:22 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 7min 18secs

Gerardo confirmed a good fill curbside.

Images attached to this report

H1 CAL - Calibration Measurement August 13, 2025 16:13 UTC

oli.patane@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 09:53:41 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86339

At the time of starting these measurements, we had only been Locked for 1.5 hours, so we were not fully thermalized
CALIBRATION_MONITOR screen and pydarm report are attached

Broadband
2025-08-13 16:13:34 - 16:18:45 UTC
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250813T161334Z.xml

Simulines
2025-08-13 16:19:57 - 16:43:04 UTC
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250813T161958Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20250813T161958Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250813T161958Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250813T161958Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250813T161958Z.hdf5

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

H1_calibration_report_20250813T161958Z.pdf

LHO VE - Comment to BTRP adapter flange and GV installed at MX

travis.sadecki@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 09:39:07 -0700

Author: travis.sadecki@ligo.org

Report ID: 86338

As of Tuesday, August 12, the pumps have been shut off and removed from this system, and the gauge tree valved back in to the main volume. Noise/vibration and pressure monitoring at MX should be back to nominal.

H1 CAL - Calibration Measurement August 13, 2025 15:30 UTC

oli.patane@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 09:09:00 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86337

At the time of starting these measurements, we had only been Locked for 1 hour (1hr10min since MAX_POWER), so we were not fully thermalized
CALIBRATION_MONITOR screen and pydarm report are attached

Broadband
2025-08-13 15:31:30 - 15:37:02 UTC
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250813T153151Z.xml

Simulines
2025-08-13 15:38:19 - 16:01:22 UTC
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250813T153820Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20250813T153820Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250813T153820Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250813T153820Z.hdf5
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250813T153820Z.hdf5

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

H1_calibration_report_20250813T153820Z.pdf

H1 General - Comment to Ops Day Shift Start

oli.patane@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 08:25:53 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86336

Last night's lockloss at 2025-08-13 12:59UTC has no obvious cause, but I did notice that the dumped power into HAM6 is an interesting shape, with two bumps instead of the usual one. However, I did find a lockloss from 2025-07-28 03:13UTC whose power has the same shape, so it's probably just an alignment thing, especially since the last lockloss was positioned in such a way that the fast shutter didn't even need to fire (86325).

Lockloss

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to Lockloss from NLN

oli.patane@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 08:12:23 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86335

Something kicked SRM and caused this lockloss. SRM was also kicked 20 seconds earlier, but we were able to recover from that.

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Ops Day Shift Start

oli.patane@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 07:40:47 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86334

TITLE: 08/13 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 3mph Gusts, 0mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.12 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Currently Observing at 153 Mpc and have been Locked for 10 minutes

H1 CDS - Comment to CDS Maintenance Summary: Tuesday 12th August 2025

david.barker@ligo.org — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 07:38:12 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86333

TW1 offload status as of 07:30 Wed: 70% complete. ETA 15:15 this afternoon.

LHO General - Tues EVE Ops Summary

corey.gray@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 22:00:53 -0700

Author: corey.gray@ligo.org

Report ID: 86331

TITLE: 08/13 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 149Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Nice shift with H1 locked 6hrs15min. We did have 3 drop-outs due to TCS ITMy CO2 (all quick and automatic recoveries). ~45min after the 3rd drop, ther was superevent S250813k. Ended the night checking out peak Perseids just before the moon was rising.
LOG:

0032 Turned off turbo at MY (janos)
Observing DROPs: TCSy Laser unlocked, but found a new locking point and came back automatically.
- 0048-0050
- 0055-0056
- 0135-0136
0212 S250813k
0426-0452 Drove out to the Y-arm +1km spot to look at Perseids (saw 6 meteors [and 6 satellites]). Moon was barely rising (about 3-diameters) as I drove back to the Control Room.

H1 TCS - TCSy CO2 Laser Drops H1 From Observing

corey.gray@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 18:08:52 -0700

Author: corey.gray@ligo.org

Report ID: 86332

Just had a couple of drops from Observing due to TCS_ITMY_CO2 guardian saying laser is unlocked and needed to find a new locking point. (Attached are the two occurrences thus far).

TCS

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Ops Day Shift End

oli.patane@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 16:36:49 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86330

TITLE: 08/12 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 143Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Corey
SHIFT SUMMARY: Currently Observing at 145 Mpc and have been Locked for 50 minutes. Relocking went pretty well today with the only concern being the fast shutter not firing during the last lockloss (86324), but luckily it seems like we were okay and that was expected in that situation.
LOG:

14:30UTC Locked for 5.5 hours and running magnetic injections
    14:40 Back into Observing
    14:45 Out of Observing for SUS charge measurements
14:57 Lockloss
19:18 Started relocking
    - Initial alignment - BS ADS convergence took 16+ minutes (86320)
20:47 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
    20:55 Observing
21:12 Lockloss
22:44 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
    22:46 Observing

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
19:33	SAF	Laser HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA is Laser HAZARD	15:33
15:00	FAC	Kim, Nelly	LVEA	YES	Tech clean	15:09
15:04	FAC	Randy, Chris	LVEA	n	Craning around BSC2	18:46
15:09	FAC	Kim	EX	n	Tech clean	16:14
15:10	FAC	Nelly	EY	n	Tech clean	16:10
15:10	PSL	Jason	PSL	YES	RefCav Alignment	16:38
15:20	VAC	Janos, Travis	MX, MY	n	Pump install	19:21
15:22	EE	Fil	CER, LVEA	n	Cable pulling	18:14
15:24		Camilla	LVEA	n	Transitioning to LASER SAFE	15:40
15:27	EE	Marc	CER/LVEA	n	Pulling cables	18:47
15:31	VAC	Gerardo	LVEA	n	Removing turbo pump	17:31
15:42		Christina, Nichole	LVEA	n	3IFO inventory	18:25
15:55		Richard	LVEA	n	Surverying the floor (people) for any weaknesses	16:12
15:56	PEM	Sam	LVEA	n	Talking to Fil and looking at accelerometers	16:12
16:12	FAC	Nelly	HAM Shack	n	Tech clean	17:09
16:13	EPO	Amber, Tour	LVEA	n	Tour	16:31
16:16	FAC	Kim	HAM Shack	n	Tech clean	17:09
16:16	SEI	Jim	LVEA	n	HEPI accumulator checks	17:34
16:35	EPO	Sam, Tooba, +1	LVEA	n	Tour	17:31
17:05	EPO	Mike +2 Spokane Review	LVEA	n	Tour	18:34
17:06	EE	Jackie	LVEA	n	Joining Fil and Marc	18:47
17:13	FAC	Nelly, Kim	LVEA	n	Tech clean	18:19
17:34		Richard	LVEA	n	Checking on work	17:51
17:44		Camilla	LVEA	n	Looking for Richard	17:51
18:02		Richard, Tooba, +1	Roof	n	Being on the roof	18:14
18:34		Camilla	LVEA	YES	Transitioning LVEA to laser hazard	18:47
18:41	SQZ	Sheila, Matt, Jennie	LVEA	YES	SQZT0 table work	20:04
18:46	EPO	Mike, Spokane Review	YARM	n	Driving down YARM	20:21
18:47	SQZ	Camilla	LVEA	YES	Joining SQZ crew	20:04
18:49	LASER	LVEA is LASER HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA IS LASER HAZARD	09:49
20:21	VAC	Janos, Travis	MY	n	Continuing pump work	22:17
20:29		Christina, Nichole	MX, MY	n	3IFO	21:59
23:15	VAC	Janos	MY	n	Turning off pump	00:45

LHO General - Tues EVE Ops Transition

corey.gray@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 16:32:52 -0700

Author: corey.gray@ligo.org

Report ID: 86329

TITLE: 08/12 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 144Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 13mph Gusts, 8mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.04 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.17 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Got the hand-off from OIi which was standard other than their mention of the Fast Shutter note after a lockloss they had from their first locking attempt post-Maintenance. H1 has currently been locked for almost an hour.

(oh and Oli did also mention on leaving that they & Elenna noticed there was a Verbal Alarm for a PR3 saturation which happened about 20min after being in observing---they mentioned this is an odd thing for PR3.)

Operator Checksheet NOTES:

FOM wall scan:
- CDS Overview has:
  - (1) CDS Server Room Environment is YELLOW for MY due to Light Level being at ~65% (vs sub-5%),
  - (2) CDS ALARM box is red due to an MY VAC pressure signal (was also red yesterday) and looking at the screen for this, I'm guessing texts have already been sent to "system's engineers"
- Calibration ndscope (nuc26): Elenna noted it looked odd (all signals were flat), and she logged in to see it was paused, so she hit the Start Online button to bring it back.
- Ran the "check_dust_monitors_are_working" script and have had the usual notifications for LVEA5 & LAB2 dust monitors.
Access System "flashing doors" at: VPW LDAS entry, VPW dirty shop entry, & EY mechanical room person door.
Control Room Screenshots: "H1 Glitches" (nuc27) not updating (has trouble screen for browser, which has been case for a while)

H1 SUS - SR3 Y damping estimator test

oli.patane@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 16:11:27 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86319

Ivey, Edgard, and Brian have created new estimator fits (86233) and blend filters (86265) for the SR3 Y estimator, and we have new rate channels (86080), so we were excited to be able to take new estimator measurements (last time 85615).

Unfortunately, there were issues with installing the new filters, so I had to make do with the old filters: for the for the estimator filters, I used the fits from fits_H1SR3_2025-06-30.mat, and the blend filters are from Estimator_blend_doublenotch_SR3yaw.m, aka the DBL_notch filter and not the new skinny notch. These are the same filters used in the testing from 85615.

So the only difference between the last estimator test and this one is that the last test had the generic satamp compensation filters (85471), and this measurement has the more precise 'best possible' compensation filters (85746). Good for us to see how much of a difference the generic vs best possible compensation filters make.

Unfortunately, due to the filter installation issues as well as still trying to re set up the estimator channels following the channel name changes, I also didn't have much time to run the tests, resulting in the actual test with the estimator being only 5 minutes. Hopefully this is okay enough for at least a preliminary view of how it's working and then next week we can run a full test with the more recent filters. Like last time, the transition between the OSEM damping and the estimator damping was very smooth and the noise out of the estimator was visibly smaller than with the regular damping (ndscope1).

Measurement times
SR3 Y damp -0.1
2025-08-12 18:28:00 - 18:44:00 UTC

SR3 Y damp -0.1, OSEM damp -0.4
2025-08-12 18:46:46 - 19:03:41 UTC

SR3 Y damp -0.1, Estimator damp -0.4
2025-08-12 19:09:00 - 19:16:51 UTC

Images attached to this report

H1 TCS - TCS CO2Y Chassis Tripped off during Maintenance

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 16:00:34 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 86328

Oli told me that the TCS CO2Y Chassis Tripped off during Maintenance this morning. This is not surprising as there was alot of craning work going on near that rack and the CO2 chassis are known to be fussy, see FRS 6639.

When I went to untrip it both indicator lights were red on it but after key-ing off/on, it turned on with no issues.

H1 General - Comment to Lockloss

oli.patane@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 15:54:20 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86327

Back to Observing 22:46 UTC

H1 General - Comment to Lockloss

oli.patane@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 15:54:03 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86326

I checked the vacuum channels and there was no excursion around the lockloss time so we didn't burn anything

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to Lockloss

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 15:24:04 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 86325

Oli, Elenna, Keita, Sheila, Jennie, Camilla

Oli noticed that ICS_LCOK had a check that the fast shutter didn't fire. Elenna and Oli then confirmed this.

We found that the fast shutter did not fire because the threshold of light at the AS port was not high enough to fire it. There was no danger here and it should not have fired. This is a rare occurrence where the light goes towards the input rather than output and is caught by baffles.

See plots of today's lockloss with no spike of light and no fast shutter closing via HAM6 GS13 vs a normal (earthquake) LL where the light spikes (especially as seen on Keita's 81080 VP power monitor) and the fast shutter closes.

It is unusual that we have had this rare type of lockloss twice in a couple of months (27th June: 85383). So this can be monitored, I added this plot to the "lockloss select" command by putting it into /sys/h1/templates/locklossplots

Keita requested we checked the power on ASC-AS_C is at it's normal level with a 2W DRMI lock. It is within the normal range of the last three locks, see attached.

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Lockloss

oli.patane@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 14:15:38 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86324

Lockloss at 2025-08-12 21:12UTC after 25 minutes locked

Lockloss

H1 SQZ - SQZ Pump Path Alignment Adjusted

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 14:05:36 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 86323

Sheila, Jennie, Matt, Camilla. WP#12750

Followed what we did in 82881, but did not need to adjust alignment through the EOM.

Starting with:

89mW into EOM, 85mW out of EOM.
With 5V on ISS AOM controlmon: 22mW in 0th order and 9mW in first order beam.
With 0V on ISS AOM controlmon: 33mW after AOM

Then with 0V on ISS AOM controlmon, increased to 73mW (85% throughput). Then put 5V on controlmon and started to maximize the 1st order beam. We decided to not completely maximize 1st order as this reduces overall throughput and our current aim is to increase total green throughout, not ISS AOM range.

Ended with:

With 5V on ISS AOM controlmon: 40mW in 0th order and 13mW in first order beam.

Sheila then adjusted the alignment into the fiber and maximized H1:SQZ-OPO_REFL_DC_POWER from 1.55 to 2.8.

This allowed us to have an OPO setpoint of 80uW with 20mW going into the fiber, wirth 5 on the controlmon and a spare 20mW that we could give to the fiber. Note that after ~1hour when we got to NLN, the controlmon had decreased from 5 to 2.5. So the power to the AOM may need to be increased next time we loose lock. Maybe with SQZT0 temperature changes now doors are on and fans are off.

There was a high pitched noise in SQZT7, close to the -Y side of the table, we couldn’t figure out what it was and maybe will have someone from EE help us with it another week.

I ran the SCAN_OPOTEMP guardian state (twice as it was far off) once we wer close to NLN.

H1 CDS - CDS Maintenance Summary: Tuesday 12th August 2025

david.barker@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 13:09:46 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86322

WP12746 h1omc0 Low Noise ADC Autocal Test

EJ, Jonathan, Dave:

For a first test we restarted h1iopomc0 three times to run an autocal on the low-noise ADC -- each time the autocal Failed. Next test will be to power cycle existing card leading to possible replacement.

WP12755 TW1 Raw Minute Trend Offload

Dave:

h1daqtw1 was configured to write it raw minutes into a new local directory to isolate the last 6 months of data from the running system. The NDS service on h1daqnds1 was restarted to serve these data from this location while the file transfer progresses.

Restarts

Tue12Aug2025
LOC TIME HOSTNAME MODEL/REBOOT
09:06:26 h1omc0 h1iopomc0 <<< three ADC AUTOCAL tests
09:08:12 h1omc0 h1iopomc0
09:08:58 h1omc0 h1iopomc0
09:09:12 h1omc0 h1omc <<< start user models
09:09:26 h1omc0 h1omcpi
11:51:19 h1daqnds1 [DAQ] <<< reconfigure for TW1 offload

H1 General - LVEA Swept following T1500386

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 13:07:51 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 86321

Unplugged an unused extension cord by the PSL racks.

High bay and LVEA and entrance lights turned off, paging system off. Oli checked WAP is off.

Everything else looked good.

H1 ISC - Beamsplitter ADS convergence in initial alignment taking too long

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 13:06:17 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 86320

Today Oli and I saw that the ADS convergence checker for the beamsplitter was taking forever to return True during initial alignment, despite the fact that the signals appeared well-converged. The convergence threshold is set on line 1158 of ALIGN_IFO.py, and it is 1.5 for both pitch and yaw. Watching the log, the yaw output seemed to quickly be below this value, while the pitch output hovered between about 1.8 to 6. I tried raising the value to 5, but pitch still stayed mostly above that value. I finally changed it to 10, and the state completed. Overall, we were waiting for convergence for over 16 minutes. It seems like the convergence values for pitch and yaw should be different. It took about two minutes for the pitch and yaw ADS outputs to reach their steady value. On ndscope minute trend, the yaw average value appears to be around zero, while for pitch the average value is around -4. The convergence checker averages over 20 seconds.

The value is still 10, but that might be too high.

Images attached to this report

H1 SUS - Field Cabling for JAC Tip/Tilts

filiberto.clara@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 12:51:32 -0700

Author: filiberto.clara@ligo.org

Report ID: 86318

WP 12749
Drawing D0902810-v11

Installation of the field cabling for the JAC tip/tilts completed. Cables pulled from the CER SUS-C3 rack to the SUS-R1 field rack. The DB25 cables going from the Sat Amp chassis were pulled to to the HAM1 D4 and D6 flanges.

F. Clara, M. Pirello, D. Sigg

H1 CDS - Field Rack SUS-R7

filiberto.clara@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 12:48:31 -0700

Author: filiberto.clara@ligo.org

Report ID: 86317

WP 12756
Rack and Cable Tray Layout D1002704-v8

A new electrical rack was positioned next to the SUS-R4 rack. The new rack will be designated as SUS-R7. Installation of cable tray, DC power strips, power junction box will be installed in the upcoming weeks.

Randy, F. Clara, J. Figueroa, and M. Pirello

SUS

H1 PSL - PSL FSS RefCav Tune-up (WP 12751)

jason.oberling@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 10:49:00 -0700

Author: jason.oberling@ligo.org

Report ID: 86315

The FSS RefCav TPD has been on a downward trend again, so I tuned up the alignment on the PSL table this morning. All work was done with the ISS ON and diffracting ~3.8% unless otherwise noted. As usual, I began with a power budget of the FSS path:

FSS In: 273.8 mW
AOM In: 273.1 mW
AOM Out, Single Pass: 188.6 mW
- Single Pass Diffraction Efficiency: 69.1%
AOM Out, Double Pass: 135.0 mW
- Double Pass Diffraction Efficiency: 71.6%
EOM Out: 135.0 mW

The AOM's single pass diffraction efficiency was a little low, so I touched up the AOM alignment to improve it. I also tweaked the alignment of mirror M21 (that reflects the RefCav beam back through the AOM for the double pass) to improve the double pass diffraction efficiency (since the AOM moved). Finally I slightly tweaked the EOM alignment to center the beam on the input and output apertures and measured the power transmitted through the EOM:

AOM Out, Single Pass: 196.3 mW
- Single Pass Diffraction Efficiency: 71.9%
AOM Out, Double Pass: 137.9 mW
- Double Pass Diffraction Efficiency: 70.2 %
EOM Out: 138.1 mW

I then tweaked the alignment into the RefCav using the alignment iris and manually tweaking the picomotor-equipped mirror mounts. The RefCav locked on the first attempt, with an initial TPD of ~0.735 V. I then used the picomotors to fine tune the alignment and managed to get a TPD of ~0.845 V. To end, I unlocked the RefCav and tweaked the beam alignment onto the RefCav's RFPD, then measured the RefCav visibility using the RFPD voltage:

Unlocked: 1.176 V
Locked: 0.197 V
Visibility: 83.2%

I then turned off the ISS (we turn it off while the enclosure returns to thermal equilibrium, because during this process the PMC transmission can change; we don't want the ISS to actuate on the laser power until things stabilize), left the enclosure, and returned it to Science Mode operation. I let the enclosure return to thermal equilibrium for about an hour and then checked on things. When I turned the ISS back ON I had to increase the ISS RefSignal from -1.99 V to -1.98 V to hold our diffracted power at ~4%. I then did on final tweak of the RefCav alignment using our picomotor mirrors; I was able to get the RefCav TPD up to ~0.854 V. At this point the RefCav tune up is complete and the PSL is ready for post-maintenance IFO recovery. This closes LHO WP 12751.

LHO VE - Tue CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 10:37:46 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86316

Tue Aug 12 10:07:51 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 7min 48secs

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - Comment to Lockloss

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 09:49:04 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 86314

Oli, Camilla

This lockloss occurs while the excitation on ETMX ESD was ramping up but doesn't look related to this. It looks like am ETM_GLITCH type lockloss.

Interestingly, at this time our DARM to L3 control has been moved from ETMX to ITMX and you can clearly see the glitch in ITMX_L3, see attached. As Sheila has been telling us al along, this is a clear indicator that the issue has nothing to do with the ETMX SUS glitching and is caused by DARM with the SUS just being the witness.

Lockloss

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Lockloss

oli.patane@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 08:03:51 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86313

Lockloss at 2025-08-12 14:57UTC right before the start of maintenance. Haven't looked yet to see if it was caused by the SUS charge meaurements or by something else

Lockloss

H1 General - Ops Day Shift Start

oli.patane@ligo.org — Tue, 12 Aug 2025 07:39:29 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 86312

TITLE: 08/12 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 12mph Gusts, 6mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.13 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Currently have been Locked for over 5.5 hours and out of Observing to run injections

LHO General - Mon EVE Ops Summary

corey.gray@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 21:57:35 -0700

Author: corey.gray@ligo.org

Report ID: 86310

TITLE: 08/12 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Very easy shift with H1 locked over 11.5hrs (we've also "cooled" down to 85degF!)
LOG: n/a

X1 DTS - SPi Optomechanics: Picomotor Assembly Components

jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 20:29:48 -0700

Author: jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org

Report ID: 86311

J. Kissel, C. Compton Camilla and I took some pictures of what supply of picomotor assembly materials we (existing ICS Supply vs. what SPI) have and in what state of assembly they are in order to familiarize myself with the process of building up new assemblies. To the best of my knowledge, there's no assembly procedure. Instead, we have the Picomotor Fact Page (E2100196) [which I've, as of this aLOG, heavily updated / curated]: - A well-labeled exploded assembly drawing with only minor assembly errors, (Page 2 of D2100433) - a hand illustration from Rich on the wiring connections for an IXM100.C2, right-handed mount (D1400279) - the expected two-motor pinout of the receiving D25M to 4x MM4F quadrapus cable (D1101516) - Some instruction on how dis-mount and re-mount fully assembled picomotors (E2500163) and thru a linear combination of these, you could fumble your way through it. The picomotors themselves have evolved over the years as the original prefer vendor, New Focus, was bought out by Newport. :: First picture shows the difference between an old picomotor (left), and the modern 8301-UHV-KAP that we buy now (right). I've created D2500246 (as opposed to the old, non-specific E1000197) that captures the specific features of this model. The key differences between old vs. new being - The wires' insulation is kapton, not colored teflon - The wire lengths is a nice healthy 7 [in], not a short 2 [in] that required icky extension - The label of which wire is which is stamped into the metal (a "-" in the lower-left corner to indicate that the wire closest to that stamp is the negative lead, or "return") vs. indicated by color of wire. :: Second picture shows the modern 8301-UHV-KAP picomotor by itself. Note, the "1" in 8301 indicates that we've chosen the 0.5" throw. :: Third picture shows the cable unfurled and compared against the 1 [in] hole pattern of the optical table beneath the foil. OK, now that you've gotten to know the raw picomotor, let's talk about cnonnectorizing and modifying it to suit our needs. We only have the old style picomotor fully assembled to picture as example, but it'll serve the purpose. :: Fourth picture shows the real manifestation of Rich's artist impression of the fully connectorized two-motor system. :: ECR E1400327 has us install a motion limiting shaft collar along the throw of the picomotor to limit the motion from the edge of its range where it's been found to get stuck. The collar was originally a custom D1400189 per -v1 of the ECR, but now it's a stock McMaster Carr shaft collar (6436k131, with the black-oxide steel #4-40 x 3/8 [in] L SHCS replaced with a stainless, otherwise identical, SHCS, 92196A108). The stock collar is then modified to be a bit thinner, per D1800220. Finally, to prevent the shaft collar from freezing against the picomotor body, we install a slip-on LIGO-cut kapton "washer" (D1400226; cut from 12 [in] x 12 [in] x 0.005 [in] sheet stock) around the threaded adjustment screw. - Fifth and Sixth pictures show how the shaft collar is shaved thinner, - Seventh picture shows the Kapton washers, - Eighth picture shows the collars assembled on the motor, and where the washer would be placed (these didn't have washers at the time of the picture, but we've since installed the on their to form a complete, albiet not-so-vacuum-compatible assembly). :: Once connectorized, per Rich's drawing, to the 4-pin MMF connnector 803-003-07M6-4PN-598A, then the connector is secured to a custom L-bracket D1002763 via the connector's thumb screw. That L-bracket then secures to the optic mount's "other" 1/4"-20 mounting hole (with "the" 1/4"-20 mounting hole, 90-deg away, is presumably used to secure the mount to a post or breadboard). Note -- the L-bracket's thru-hole for the MM connector is keyed, but it's not sized for any feature on the actual connector, so you're free to orient the connector in any way in within the bracket. Of course, each socket connector on the legs of the quadrapus it'll connect to are much better keyed, so there's no worry of pin-clocking or anything nasty like that. - Ninth picture shows the D1002763 L-bracket. Note -- this a D1002763-v2 Type 1 bracket, so it's mounting hole is threaded for 1/4"-20 bolt (rather than Type 2 which has a thru-hole requiring a nut). - Tenth, Eleventh, Twelth, and Thirteenth pictures show how the MM connector is assembled on to that portion of the D1002763 L-bracket. Finally, just because it came up during the pre-clean-and-bake inspection (see discussion in CNB:2225), - Fourtheenth picture shows the inside of the 803-003-07M6-4PN-598A MM connector -- a black plastic that Glenair calls a "High Grade Rigid Dialectric," without specifying the material (see table in Section 3.1 on page 2 of Mighty_Mouse_Series 80_performance-test-report-iaw-mil-dtl-810.pdf from T2500025). I mostly show the picture of the old connectorized picomotor system to indicate that we've indeed been using this connect and its inner material for a long time, and the Clean-and-bake process (T2100001) appears to be enough (see e.g. bake loads ICS:10543 and ICS:10557). ISC, OpsInfo, SQZ, SUS

Images attached to this report

H1 AOS - Mon Eve Ops Transition

corey.gray@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 17:10:56 -0700

Author: corey.gray@ligo.org

Report ID: 86309

TITLE: 08/11 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 11mph Gusts, 7mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.17 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

H1's been locked almost 7hrs and Tony took care of the SQZ guardian thing they discovered during the day shift (yay!). With just that said, it's smooth sailing thus far.

H1 General - Monday Ops Day Shift report.

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 17:03:18 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86308

TITLE: 08/11 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY:
Power supply issues as soon as I walk in.

Viewports got covered by Robert.
Fil got the 18V power supply working again, and we started to relock but got stuck in AS Shutters because a PST driver was still not yet powered because it's breaker had tripped.
Alogs: 86290 & 86296

NLN reached by 17:21:50 UTC.
Comissioners Comissioned some Scattered Light Investigations and some quasi anti-SQZin.

Observing reached by 19:47:01 UTC

Dropped from Observing due to the SQZ_MAN going to NO_Squeezin at 21:33:42 UTC for some strange reason. Mystery!
Back to Observing at 21:38:43 UTC after requesting FDS.

Mystery solved! Ryan Short found out that when a Guardian node is stalled, the unstalling node calls a revive function which returns a node to the "Last Requested State".
And since we were now in a strange state that may wake up the OWL Operator....
We resolved it By:

UnManage H1 Manager.
Manual ISC_LOCK to Inject_Squeezing
Allow SQZ_MAN to reach FDS
Then Manual ISC_LOCK back to NLN.

LOG:

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
19:33	SAF	Laser HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA is Laser HAZARD	11:33
15:04	PEM	Robert	LVEA	Yes	Closing View ports	17:04
15:22	Fast Shutter	Richard	Mech room Mez	n	Rebooting the Fast Shutter	16:18
15:29	EE	Fil	Mech Room Mez & LVEA HAM6	N	Working on Fast Shutter & PZT power cycle	17:29
15:35	FAC	Kim & Nellie	Mid X Mid Y	N	Technical Cleaning Kim out @ 16:18UTC	16:41
17:33	Optics	Kieta	Optics Lab	Yes	Working in the Optics lab	17:56
19:04	VAC	Janos	MY	n	Closing valve	19:21
19:38	SPI	Jeff	Optics Lab	yes	SPI inventory check	19:44
20:50	Tour	Mike & Tour Group	Control Room & Overpass	N	Leading a tour	22:50
22:27	SPI	Jeff	Optics Lab	Yes	SPI Inventory	00:27
23:06	ISS	Camilla	Optics lab	Yes	Working on some optics in the lab.	23:36

H1 TCS - Comment to Estimating surface defocus of test masses and absorption from HOM spacing

matthewrichard.todd@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 16:48:59 -0700

Author: matthewrichard.todd@ligo.org

Report ID: 86307

Absorption values here should be ppb, not ppm.

H1 PSL - PSL 10-Day Trends

ryan.short@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 16:23:13 -0700

Author: ryan.short@ligo.org

Report ID: 86306

FAMIS 31098

The PMC alignment last Tuesday seems to have made the PMC REFL signal a bit less noisy, so even though there wasn't much power improvement, the alignment is slightly better. Also, the RefCav alignment is drifting again (as always, likely due to temperature changes) as evidenced by the dropping TPD signal, but Jason will touch this up tomorrow on-table.

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - Comment to Power Supply Failure for HAM6 ISC field racks

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 15:17:41 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86305

This Power Supply Failure did cause a lock loss.
we held in Check_AS Shutters due to this same power supply failure.

NLN reached by 17:21:50 UTC
Observing reached by 19:47:01 UTC

Lockloss

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Owl Shift Locklosses

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:19:06 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86302

At 05:47:34 there was an unknown Lockloss https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~lockloss/index.cgi?event=1438926473
This Lockloss's plots are showing that the DARM signal was the first signal to deviate from nominal.

Lockloss

Images attached to this report

X1 SEI - SPI Optomechanics: What Right- vs. Left-handed Siskiyou Mounts Look Like

jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:10:02 -0700

Author: jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org

Report ID: 86303

J. Kissel I took some pictures of the SPI pathfinder's (QTY 4) IXM100.C2-VC (right-handed) and (QTY 2) IXM100.C2L-VC (left-handed) mounts in their "raw" pre-assembled clean state since (1) it's my first time dealing with Siskiyou mounts, (2) the "assembly procedure" D1100362-v1 thus far is only an exploded view of numbered-but-not-labeled and out-dated parts for am unspecified, but left-handed mount, (3) they come out of the clean-and-back process quite disassembled but maybe in the same bag, (4) it's always useful to show what each company's convention of "right" vs. "left" handed optics mounts so you can tell them apart, when you've got lots of unlabeled clean mounts in front, and (5) "right" and "left" are perspective-dependent descriptions of convention, and so it's useful to unambiguously specify. So -- to determine if they're right- or left- handed -- orient the optic holder with the optic (back) side towards you, and the adjustment knobs (back) side away from you. Rotate the mount such that the optic-securing #8-32 set screw hole is up. Hold up your trusty left-o-meter -- your left hand formed into a capital L shape with your index finger and and thumb (palm facing away from you). If it matches what you see, it's a left-handed IXM100.C2L mount with the "opening" to your upper right from the described perspective. If it doesn't match, it's an IXM100.C2 with the "opening" to your upper left from the described perspective. First picture is both mounts side-by-side; four right-handed IXM100.C2's on the left and two IXM100.C2L's on the right. The second-thru-fourth pictures are various views of the IXM100.C2 right-handed mount. In the second picture I'm making the American sign language letter R. The fifth-thru-seventh pictures are various views of the IXM100.C2L left-handed mount. In the fifth picture I'm making the American sign language letter L. ISC, OpsInfo, SEI, SUS

Images attached to this report

H1 AOS - Comment to DQ Shift July 28-August 3

samantha.callos@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 13:59:41 -0700

Author: samantha.callos@ligo.org

Report ID: 86304

The spike in the YMAN accelerometer is caused by the daily dewar fill noise at the Y-manifold cryopump. The noise at 20 Hz (and the harmonic at 40 Hz) shown in your Friday Lock/Strain plot is likely from an AC unit housed inside the VPW (see alog 86257).

H1 ISC - Jitter coupling and frequency noise

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 13:45:06 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 86301

I ran a series of jitter and frequency noise injections last Thursday to investigate how jitter noise couples. I ran the usual frequency noise injection while we were on one carm sensor. Then, I performed the jitter injections, but I ran a 4 minute injection instead of the usual 1 minute to get better resolution.

Using these injections, I calculated the frequency noise coupling and jitter noise coupling. Then, I calculated the jitter that couples through frequency noise by measuring the jitter-to-frequency coupling, and multiplying that with the frequency-to-darm coupling. I also calculated the coupling measured by all four IMC WFS DC channels (A/B, pit/yaw), where we usually measure the coupling from IMC WFS A for the noise budget. When I estimate the frequency noise, I do not apply any corrections to account for the fact that we usually have two sensors, so in some regions we may be overestimating the frequency noise by sqrt(2).

Frequency noise is about a factor of 10 below DARM, especially at high frequency. This has been the case since we returned from the OFI vent.

Jitter noise is well-measured up to about 2 kHz. I made a higher resolution plot zoomed in from 10-50 Hz to look at the coupling measurement of some of the peaks that Robert noted. I see strong coupling of two narrow peaks.

The jitter noise that couples to frequency noise to DARM seems mostly to be much lower than the direct jitter coupling, except for WFS B yaw at low frequency. Here is another plot that compares the direct jitter coupling, jitter-to-frequency coupling, and frequency coupling as witnessed by each jitter sensor.

I did a similar exercise with frequency and intensity noise in this alog.

The DARM trace shown here is actually GDS CLEAN, meaning that some jitter noise above 100 Hz has been subtracted in the trace. However, to calculate the coupling I used the NOLINES channel, which has no jitter cleaning.

Non-image files attached to this report

frequency_noise.pdf

jitter_noise.pdf

jitter_noise_lf.pdf

jitter_to_freq_noise.pdf

jitter_through_freq_tiles.pdf

X1 SEI - SPI Optomechanics: Non-actuated Siskiyou IXM100 Clean Sub-Assemblies

jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 13:41:41 -0700

Author: jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org

Report ID: 86299

J. Kissel Clean parts for the SPI pathfinder are starting to roll in! I needed to re-characterize the first-of-its-kind-used-in-LIGO SuK fiber collimator S0272502 (DCC, ICS) now that it's been run through a test Class-B process -- and importantly after the 48 bake at 85 [deg C] (w/ 6 hour ramp up and ramp down) -- similar to how it was tested pre-bake per LHO:84825. That means need to mount it in either Class-A or Class-B equipment. So, I assembled 2x Class-A fiber collimator assemblies for production use, D2400146 using - (QTY 1) D2500094 60FC-0-A11-03-Ti, S0272502 Fiber Collimator itself [Currently Class-B; new] - (QTY 1) The D2500005 12 [mm] to 25.4 [mm] adapter ring stamped with S0272502 [Class-A; new] - (QTY 1) D1100705 3/16 [in] length #8-32 PEEK set screw [Class-A; existing stock] - (QTY 1) D2400208 Siskiyou IXM100 1 [in] Mirror Mount [Class-A; new], re-assembled*** with - (QTY 2) 1/4 [in]-100 x 1 [in] length threaded hex adjusters, with 5/64 [Class-A; new] - (QTY 2) 1/8 [in] diameter SS ball bearing [Class-A; new] - (QTY 1) D1100705 3/16 [in] length PEEK #8-32 set screw [Class-A; existing stock] With these fully assembled, I used the following existing stock of Class-B hardware and tooling to mount it and adjust it for practical use: - (QTY 1) 1/4-20 x 5/8 [in] length SS (non-vented, non-plated) SHCS [these were actually Class-A] - (QTY 1) 0.50 [in] diameter x 3 [in] length SS optics post - (QTY 2) 0.75 [in] diameter "large" adjustment knob with 2.0 [mm] hex key extension - (QTY 1) 5/64 [in] ~ 2 [mm] hex key (for #8-/32 set screws) - (QTY 1) 3/16 [in] hex ket (for 1/4-20 SHCS) *** Pro-tip for assembly of these IXM mounts :: Use the 5/64 hex key or 0.75 [in] diameter "large" adjustment knobs to insert the 1/4 [in]-100 x 1 [in] length threaded hex adjusters most of the way into the "raw" IXM mount. Then, open up the adjuster-plate-to-mounting-plate spring, gently wedge the 3/16 hex key between the front and adjuster surfaces to hold it open, leaving gloved hands free enough to insert the tiny 1/8 [in] ball bearing in place at the tip of the threaded adjuster. Then gently expand and release the 3/16 key from the spring and resume setting the adjusters to nominal position. Per "best effort," and since S0272502 has to go thru clean-and-bake again to get "classed up" to Class-A, I used - (QTY 1) 2 [m] length FC/APC to FC/PC patch cable (P5-980PM-FC-2) with the FC/PC end wiped extensively with IPA and then wrapped in sealed wipes and UHV foil to inject ~100 [mW] of light from the existing optics lab fiber-coupled laser into the Class-B fiber collimator. The first attached picture shows all of this equipment as it comes "out of the bags" from the clean-and-bake process. The second attached picture shows the fully-assembled system in use during characterization. The third attached picture shows the label on the bag that contains the fully-assembled IXM100. (This bag doesn't contain the fiber collimators or adapters themselves, though, as these are with clean-and-bake for the collimators to become Class-A and married with their respective adapter ring.)

Images attached to this report

H1 CDS - Alarms and VACSTAT bypassing MY PT243B Gauge.

david.barker@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 12:32:18 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86300

Janos has requested these alarms be bypassed and PT243 temporarily disabled in VACSTAT. Full list is:

Bypass will expire:
Wed Aug 13 12:24:46 PM PDT 2025
For channel(s):
H0:VAC-LY_CP1_TE102A_DISCHARGE_TEMP_DEGC
H0:VAC-MX_X1_PT343B_PRESS_TORR
H0:VAC-MY_Y1_PT243B_PRESS_TORR

Images attached to this report

H1 SEI - H1 ISI CPS Noise Spectra Check - Weekly

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 10:55:58 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 86297

Closes FAMIS26544, last checked in alog86165

HAM2_CPSINF_H3 has increased lines just over 60Hz

HAM4 has some increased lines at high frequency

BS ST2 has increased lines at high frequency, V3 mainly.

Non-image files attached to this report

CPS_spectra_10:37-08_11_2025.pdf

LHO VE - Mon CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 10:55:37 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86298

Mon Aug 11 10:08:07 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 8min 3secs

Images attached to this report

H1 SUS - OSEM Estimator: Theoretical Drive Request Plot Results

ivey.zhong@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 10:24:13 -0700

Author: ivey.zhong@ligo.org

Report ID: 86274

Edgard, Ivey

A few weeks ago, Oli ran some tests on the SR3 Yaw estimator (see LHO: 85745 for results). Edgard and I did some math to see if the OSEM estimator is requesting drive as expected by theory (we want our theoretical plot to align with the yellow trace in the third plot in the pdf below).

Attached below are images of the theoretical drive estimates compared against the empirical drive requests (yellow trace). The "old" theoretical drive estimate is made with the old blend filters (see LHO: 84004), and the "new" theoretical drive estimate is made with the new blend filters (see LHO: 86265).

A few notes on how we calculated the theoretical drive estimate: Because OSEM noise dominates, except at the resonances where suspoint motion dominates, we only considered OSEM noise when generating our theoretical drive estimate. We multiplied the theoretical plot by 1/3, which we eyeballed. The difference of a factor of 3 is likely an error in our math, which we can easily check. The theoretical plot deviates significantly from the empirical results below 0.6 Hz because the OSEM noise data we are using is not ideal (see the first plot in the pdf for a more accurate depiction of OSEM noise). However, the main concern is to show that the general shape is accounted for.

What the theoretical drive estimate plots show:

The "old" plot shows that the peak at 2 Hz is expected. This peak is likely not noise as we had originally believed, but a part of a larger peak that consists of the peak at 2 Hz and its adjacent peak. For the yellow trace, the dip between the two peaks is a result of the suspoint motion dipping below OSEM noise. For the black trace, the dip between the two peaks is a result of not including suspoint motion in our math. The same can be said about the peak at around 3 Hz.

An objective of the new blend filters was to damp the 2nd and 3rd peaks, as well as make the peaks more symmetrical. The "new" plot shows the peaks are successful at request less drive, but the symmetry of the peaks has not changed significantly.

Overall, the theoretical drive plot shows that the major characteristics from Oli's test are accounted for by the theory, and the estimator is working as expected!

SEI, SUS

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

85745_20250714115338_July_08_2025_SR3_Yaw_estimator_analysis.pdf

H1 PSL - ISS array work Friday

jennifer.wright@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 10:13:07 -0700

Author: jennifer.wright@ligo.org

Report ID: 86273

Jennie W

Francisco is helping me read data from the oscilloscopes we are using for the PD readout so we can measure a QPD to PD transfer function to figure out how the PDs are mis-aligned.

While he was working on this I went to re-align the input beam to the array as our last measurements of the coupling amplitude in the horizontal direction showed that the coupling was much larger than Shiva and Mayank had previously measured.

I found we could get better coupling with the input beam off in yaw on the QPD - I got this by moving the closest steering mirror to the input aperture in pitch and yaw (as these are both coupled slightly due to the QPD y and x axis not being perfectly aligned with the steering mirrors pitch and yaw directions).

Pictures I took are attached, photos one (showing AC voltage of PDs 1-4) and two (AC voltage of PDs 5-8) are only moving the steering mirror in yaw but the light went off the centre of the QPD too much (we expect it to be above 10000 counts but here it is ~6000), so I found another spot with less power drop on the QPD that still has pretty good alignment coupling to the PDs. For this latter spot I also included the photo of the QPD readout.

Photo 3 shows the QPD readout and the oscilloscope with the AC voltage values of PDs 1-4. The power on the QPD is about 9000 counts.

Photo 4 shows the oscilloscope with the AC voltage values for PDs 5-8.

Photo 5 shows the oscilloscope with the DC voltage values for PDs 1-4.

Photo 6 shows the oscilloscope with the DC voltage values for PDs 5-8.

Photo 7 shows the x, y and sum channels for the QPD on an oscilloscope.

We might have to move the QPD in yaw to centre it for this pointing into the PD array.

ISC

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to Monday Ops Morning Shift Start

sheila.dwyer@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 10:07:09 -0700

Author: sheila.dwyer@ligo.org

Report ID: 86295

It looks like shutter did close in that lockloss, which might have been caused by the power failure.

Attached are comparisons of a normal lockloss with that one.

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - Power Supply Failure for HAM6 ISC field racks

filiberto.clara@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 10:06:58 -0700

Author: filiberto.clara@ligo.org

Report ID: 86296

WP 12747

The negative rail power supply for ISC-R3 and ISC-R5 failed this morning. Fan seized and power supply tripped off. We opted to also replace the positive 18V since IFO was already down. When power was restored, we verified the fast shutter chassis HV was enabled. Control room reported issues with the PZT/shutter readback signals. On the floor we found the PZT driver chassis was powered off. Chassis was power on.

Rack ISC-C6 (U25-U27)
Power Supplies Removed: S1202017 and S1201944
Power Supplies Installed: S1201912 and S1201915

F. Clara, R. McCarthy, T. Sanchez

H1 General - Comment to Monday Ops Morning Shift Start

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 09:53:53 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86294

Earlier 6:08:34 UTC there was an 18V power supply that had stopped working which supplies power to multiple devices including the Fast Shutter infrastructure. The 18V power supply was reset and turned back on which should have powered back on the PZT driver that also gets power from the 18V supply. But the breaker on the back had been tripped.

H1 PEM - Comment to 20-40 Hz HVAC Noise

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 09:17:56 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 86293

I just want to add that we do not use PRC1 P/Y in loop in full IFO lock. However, the PRC1 error signal is the POP A DC signal from the POP QPD on HAM3. This means that the POP A QPD may be a good witness of this line, but is not the coupling source of the line.

LHO General - Well Water Pump and Storage

christopher.soike@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 09:03:41 -0700

Author: christopher.soike@ligo.org

Report ID: 86292

This morning the Well water tank located behind the carpenter shop was found to be nearly empty with under 1ft of water. At approximately 7:50am the Well water pump was energized and used to fill the tank back up. For noise and vibration considerations the well pump ran water from approximately 7:50am until 8:18am. The well tank is now full again. FMP

H1 General - Comment to Monday Ops Morning Shift Start

david.barker@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 08:06:40 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86291

Only CDS alarm this morning is the ongoing valved out PT343B at MX. I have extended its bypass to Wed.

Bypass will expire:
Wed Aug 13 08:05:06 AM PDT 2025
For channel(s):
H0:VAC-MX_X1_PT343B_PRESS_TORR

H1 General - Monday Ops Morning Shift Start

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 08:04:56 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86290

TITLE: 08/11 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Aligning
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 4mph Gusts, 2mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.11 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
H1 was down and trying to do an Initial_Alignment but saturating a number of suspensions, verbals warning about IFO_OUT from 14:17 UTC to 14:28 UTC so over 10 minutes of shaking the IFO OUT of the output arm.

I'm getting a persistent DIAG_MAIN message:
FAST_SHUTTER_HV: Fast Shutter HV not Ready

@ 1309 UTC Fast shutter channels:
H1:SYS-MOTION_C_SHUTTER_G_TRIGGER_VOLTS went to 3.877 V when it should have already dropped down to 0.5V or so.
H1:SYS-MOTION_C_SHUTTER_G_TRIGGER_POWER has increased to 1.9 mW when I'd expect it to go back down to 0

Both increased to levels that seem within the operational bound but not what their trends would suggest they should be operating at.

I cannot Close the fast shutter either.
H1:SYS-MOTION_C_FASTSHUTTER_A_READY says Busy.

Error Fault; Not Ready ; Not Closed.

Images attached to this report

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Summary

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sun, 10 Aug 2025 21:59:08 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 86289

TITLE: 08/11 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 155Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Oli
SHIFT SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 04:48 UTC

Just got to Nominal Low Noise after a 5.8 EQ from Guatemala (lockloss alog 86288).

Otherwise, just the most uneventful of shifts. Relocking was fully auto and DRMI lock was swift post-earthquake.

LOG:

None

H1 PEM - Lockloss 02:42 UTC

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sun, 10 Aug 2025 19:43:39 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 86288

Earthquake caused lockloss. This was a 5.8 EQ in Guatemala.

Lockloss

H1 AOS - Mystery beam spot may be from aperture edge in PR2 scraper baffle

robert.schofield@ligo.org — Sun, 10 Aug 2025 17:33:06 -0700

Author: robert.schofield@ligo.org

Report ID: 86287

Recently, I noticed that the mystery beam spot on the spool piece near HAM3 was much dimmer after the break this spring than in was before ( 85079) To see if this change may have been associated with the CP-Y move we made during the break, we swept through nearly the entire range of pitch and yaw (-300 to 300) while taking a video. The linked video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIwnx13NzEU&ab_channel=RobertSchofieldLIGO) shows the view from the MC2 camera viewport before the break and after the break. The drop in intensity over the break is quite obvious, but I can see no further change in intensity during the sweep. The sweep can be monitored in the video, both before the break and after, by the motion of the ghost beam spots on the ballast baffle below PR2 (on the center left of the image). The CP move during the break was larger than these sweeps, so it is still possible that the move during the break was the source of the drop in intensity.

However, another possibility is that the movement of the PR2 beamspot, and the reduction in clipping on the PR2 scraper baffle was the source of the drop in intensity. The last pictures I took of the mystery beam spot before the break were in January of 2025. After that, there were a series of moves of the PR2 beam spot and associated reductions in the intensity of the beam coming out the HAM3 viewport that were made in February of 2025 (82670, 82722, 82740, 82793), reducing the power in the beam that comes out of the viewport from about 17mW to about 3.5mW. The ”before” clip in the video below was made in December of 2024, when the HAM3 viewport beam was in the 17mW era, while the ”after” clip is at 3.5 mW, if we assume it is the same now as before the break (could be worth checking). If the ”mystery” beam spot comes from the edge of the scraper baffle (see figure), then the PR2 spot moves might have reduced its intensity, by a factor of about 5 if it is proportional to the light at the viewport.

The figure shows that there is a spot on the edge of the scraper baffle (which is only there when laser light is present) that seemed to get dimmer when the mystery spot got dimmer. The diagram shows how the reflection/diffraction would light up the wall of the spool piece as seen in the photographs. The edge of the aperture would be lit by the beam that is clipped and especially by the beam reflected off of the baffle to the viewport and reflecting back to the baffle.

Non-image files attached to this report

Figure1-ApertureAndBeamSpot.pdf

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Start

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sun, 10 Aug 2025 16:44:39 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 86286

TITLE: 08/10 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 152Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 14mph Gusts, 7mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.11 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of Aug 9 22:42 UTC (25 hr lock!)

H1 General - Sunday Ops Day shift End

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Sun, 10 Aug 2025 16:42:35 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86285

TITLE: 08/10 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 156Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY:
H1 has been locked for 25 hours.
No drops out of Observing, locklosses, or issues. Survived a 6.1 Mag earthquake from Turkey.
No Superevent Candiates either.

LOG:

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
19:33	SAF	Laser HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA is Laser HAZARD	11:33
21:07	Tour	Ibrihim & Tour	Overpass	N	Leading a tour	21:37

LHO VE - Sun CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Sun, 10 Aug 2025 13:48:31 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86284

Sun Aug 10 10:07:12 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 7min 9secs

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Sunday Morning Ops Day shift start

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Sun, 10 Aug 2025 07:55:15 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86283

TITLE: 08/10 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 142Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 8mph Gusts, 5mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.09 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
H1 has been locked and Observing for just over 16 Hours.
All systems seem to be running smoothly.

Superevent candidate S250810ck was announced right before I walked in to the control room.
An hour ago we had an interested earthquake that was pretty close but small enough that we didn't lose lock.

Images attached to this report

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Summary

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sat, 09 Aug 2025 21:58:39 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 86282

TITLE: 08/10 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Oli
SHIFT SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 22:42 UTC

As hoped, a very quiet shift in which we were observing for the whole time. Nothing else of note.

LOG:

None

H1 General - Saturday Ops Shift End & Lockloss From NLN

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Sat, 09 Aug 2025 16:31:18 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86281

TITLE: 08/09 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Relocking went Smoothly from this morning's Earthquake & lockloss. I was able to do a quick Initial_Alignment while the earthquake rang down.
Made it back to NLN at 16:30 observing at 16:33 UTC.

At 19:06:24 UTC I started a Calibration meaurement that had enough time to thermalize.

At 20:50:50 UTC an incoming earthquake was announced and at 20:58:01 UTC H1 was unlocked by the 5.9M Earthquake.

H1 Relocked just fine without any intervention from me.
NLN reached at 22:40:23 UTC
Observing Reached at 22:42:36 UTC

Handing off a Locked IFO to the Eve Shifter.

LOG:

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
19:33	SAF	Laser HAZARD	LVEA	YES	LVEA is Laser HAZARD	11:33
19:23	Tour	Janos , Jennie, Elenna, Ryan S, Fred & Tours	Control Rm & Overpass.	N	Giving multiple tours	21:09

Lockloss

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Start

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sat, 09 Aug 2025 16:01:19 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 86280

TITLE: 08/09 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 156Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 8mph Gusts, 3mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.04 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.06 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 22:42 UTC

Last two locklosses were due to earthquakes and H1 has otherwise been stable with good range. Expecting a quiet shift.

H1 CAL - Well Thermalized Calibration Sweep

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Sat, 09 Aug 2025 13:36:41 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86279

Command Ran:
pydarm measure --run-headless bb
2025-08-09 12:06:24,938 config file: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/ifo/pydarm_cmd_H1.yaml

notification: new test result
notification: end of measurement
notification: end of test
diag> save /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250809T190625Z.xml
/ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250809T190625Z.xml saved
diag> quit
EXIT KERNEL

2025-08-09 12:11:35,388 bb measurement complete.
2025-08-09 12:11:35,388 bb output: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250809T190625Z.xml
2025-08-09 12:11:35,389 all measurements complete.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Command Ran:
gpstime;python /ligo/groups/cal/src/simulines/simulines/simuLines.py -i /ligo/groups/cal/H1/simulines_settings/newDARM_20231221/settings_h1_20250212.ini;gpstime
Approximate Time ran:
~UTC: 2025-08-09 19:17:38
~GPS: 1438802276

2025-08-09 19:17:38,535 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:17:38,543 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:17:38,548 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:17:38,553 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:17:38,557 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:17:38,557 | INFO | Overall driving parameters:
2025-08-09 19:17:38,557 | INFO | Preparing to scan the following sweeps ['DARM_OLGTF', 'PCALY2DARMTF', 'L1_SUSETMX_iEXC2DARMTF', 'L2_SUSETMX_iEXC2DARMTF', 'L3_SUSETMX_iEXC2DARMTF']
2025-08-09 19:17:38,557 | INFO | With parameters: BW: 0.14; DrivingCycles: 40; MinDriveTime: 3; Averages: 5; Overlap: 0; RampUpTime: 3; RampDownTime: 3; SettleTimePercent: 10; ScanTime: 1229
2025-08-09 19:17:38,558 | INFO | For DARM_OLGTF, prepaing EXC: H1:LSC-DARM1_EXC; A: ['H1:LSC-DARM1_IN2', 'H1:LSC-DARM1_EXC']; B: ['H1:LSC-DARM1_IN1', 'H1:LSC-DARM1_IN2']
2025-08-09 19:17:38,560 | INFO | For PCALY2DARMTF, prepaing EXC: H1:CAL-PCALY_SWEPT_SINE_EXC; A: ['H1:CAL-PCALY_RX_PD_OUT_DQ', 'H1:CAL-PCALY_RX_PD_OUT_DQ', 'H1:CAL-PCALY_TX_PD_OUT_DQ']; B: ['H1:CAL-DELTAL_EXTERNAL_DQ', 'H1:LSC-DARM_IN1_DQ', 'H1:LSC-DARM_IN1_DQ']
2025-08-09 19:17:38,562 | INFO | For L1_SUSETMX_iEXC2DARMTF, prepaing EXC: H1:SUS-ETMX_L1_CAL_EXC; A: ['H1:SUS-ETMX_L1_CAL_EXC']; B: ['H1:LSC-DARM_IN1_DQ']
2025-08-09 19:17:38,563 | INFO | For L2_SUSETMX_iEXC2DARMTF, prepaing EXC: H1:SUS-ETMX_L2_CAL_EXC; A: ['H1:SUS-ETMX_L2_CAL_EXC']; B: ['H1:LSC-DARM_IN1_DQ']
2025-08-09 19:17:38,565 | INFO | For L3_SUSETMX_iEXC2DARMTF, prepaing EXC: H1:SUS-ETMX_L3_CAL_EXC; A: ['H1:SUS-ETMX_L3_CAL_EXC']; B: ['H1:LSC-DARM_IN1_DQ']
2025-08-09 19:17:38,579 | INFO | Start data collection while monitoring 5 processes
2025-08-09 19:17:49,583 | INFO | Scanning frequency 7.97 in Scan : PCALY2DARMTF on PID: 2113968
2025-08-09 19:17:49,583 | INFO | Scanning frequency 12.86 in Scan : L1_SUSETMX_iEXC2DARMTF on PID: 2113971

...
...
...

2025-08-09 19:40:11,968 | INFO | Drive, on L1_SUSETMX_iEXC2DARMTF, at frequency: 12.33, and amplitude 15.362, is finished. GPS start and end time stamps: 1438803608, 1438803625
2025-08-09 19:40:12,277 | INFO | 0 still running.
2025-08-09 19:40:12,277 | INFO | gathering data for a few more seconds
2025-08-09 19:40:18,285 | INFO | Finished gathering data. Data ends at 1438803635.0
2025-08-09 19:40:18,396 | INFO | It is SAFE TO RETURN TO OBSERVING now, whilst data is processed.
2025-08-09 19:40:18,396 | INFO | Commencing data processing.
2025-08-09 19:40:18,396 | INFO | Ending lockloss monitor. This is either due to having completed the measurement, and this functionality being terminated; or because the whole process was aborted.
2025-08-09 19:41:00,607 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:41:00,615 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:41:00,620 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:41:00,625 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
2025-08-09 19:41:00,630 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250809T191738Z.hdf5
PDT: 2025-08-09 12:41:00.802402 PDT
UTC: 2025-08-09 19:41:00.802402 UTC
GPS: 1438803678.802402

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

H1_calibration_report_20250809T191738Z.pdf

LHO VE - Sat CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Sat, 09 Aug 2025 10:21:59 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 86278

Sat Aug 09 10:06:22 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 6min 18secs

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Saturday Ops Shift Start & Lockloss From NLN

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Sat, 09 Aug 2025 08:11:06 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 86277

TITLE: 08/09 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Tony
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: EARTHQUAKE
    Wind: 0mph Gusts, 0mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.25 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.12 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
When I walked in H1 was locked and Observing but there was an Incoming 6.0 Mag Earthquake from Severo-Kuril’sk, Russia that caused a lockloss at 14:36 UTC.

Images attached to this report