This is for FAMIS #26416.
Laser Status:
    NPRO output power is 1.842W
    AMP1 output power is 70.19W
    AMP2 output power is 140.3W
    NPRO watchdog is GREEN
    AMP1 watchdog is GREEN
    AMP2 watchdog is GREEN
    PDWD watchdog is GREEN

PMC:
    It has been locked 4 days, 6 hr 50 minutes
    Reflected power = 23.09W
    Transmitted power = 105.5W
    PowerSum = 128.6W

FSS:
    It has been locked for 0 days 0 hr and 14 min
    TPD[V] = 0.82V

ISS:
    The diffracted power is around 3.9%
    Last saturation event was 0 days 3 hours and 31 minutes ago

Possible Issues:
    PMC reflected power is high

On May 15, 2025, "close-out" photos were taken of everything on the new HAM1 SEI ISI Optics Table a few days before HAM1 was sealted up & pumped down.  Took almost 300 photos/videos (~66Gb)!  These photos/videos have been uploaded to this google drive location:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1w4GwB5H2c7Dgw37FxRgLK0ganJ1nycxs?usp=sharing

Notes:

• Cameras Used:  Canon 60D & iPhone13
• Types Of Photos:  Took a variety of photos (various wide angles, and then close-up Top Views of most of the optical components).
• Photo Names/Info:  To help give information for each photo, renamed each photo with info of the image
  • For names of optical components I used a few documents:  
    • Layout drawing D1000313---specifically looking at the Added File of Camilla's Cartoon image which has all components labeled.
    • Also used Camilla's google document, G2501073.
  • Photos are numbered and sorted in a way which makes sense (i.e. all wide shots are listed fiirst, next are top views from the west side of HAM1, top views from the east side, and then masses.
• Orientation:  Top view photos are oriented so the west side on the "top" (similar to the layout drawings mentioned above).
• "Before" Photos:  For comparison, "before" photos from April 7th are in this photo folder (posted in alog #83790)

Fri May 23 10:19:34 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 19min 30secs

TITLE: 05/23 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 4mph Gusts, 1mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.10 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Sheila is sorting through the state of alignment which will then lead to continuing ISCT1 alignment work out on the floor.  Mitch and Randy are at EX starting on the wind fence.

Janos

Today morning the pressure in HAM1 rose quite quickly to ~1E-3 Torr. As I was driving to the site, Richard found out that the new Agilent leak checker, which backed the turbo, stopped. So he valved out the turbo via its main gate valve.
After arrival, I valved out the leak checker, valved in the Supersucker cart's Anest Iwata ISP500 pump, and restarted the turbo, then valved it back again. The pressure very quickly dropped to ~7E-6 Torr (roughly where it was before the incident). Since then, everything is nominal.

In the afternoon around 3 pm I valved in IP13 (500 l/s Starcell) to HAM1. The pressure nicely dropped to the low E-6s, however, it started growing. I checked the controller in the MER, and found that it is unable to hold the usual -7000 Volts, in fact, it was around -3000 Volts, and dropping (towards 0). Moreover, I found that the controller's comm cable is not wired properly to CDS, its channel reads IP1/B ion pump. So I valved out the Ion-pump.
With Dave, Fil, Richard, and Patrick we looked into the problem, and we quickly found that the Ion-pump's comm cable physically was not wired in at all.
I quickly plugged the valved out Ion-pump to an IPC mini, which obviously hardly could hold the pressure, but the voltage still slowly converged to -7000 V. After this, I located a spare controller (brand new, identical to the one we used), also attached a bypass connector to the comm outlet, and plugged the Ion pump to this one. It quickly reached the nominal -7000 Volts. (See the new (left) and old, broken down (right) controller on the IP-controller rack in the MER).
Early next week, after (hopefully) a successful leak check on HAM1, the Ion-pump will be valved in permanently. The comm cable wiring will also be finalized later.

TITLE: 05/22 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY: Another busy day! After some pumpdown troubleshooting this morning, ISCT1 was rolled back into place, its bellows were attached, and beam alignment on the table is ongoing. Cycled ISC_LOCK through DOWN and SDF_REVERT, but ran into an issue where ETM ESD chassis needed to be restarted after the power outage last night. I also ran a quick rotation stage calibration.

• Sensor correction is ON
• All chambers are back to their nominal configurations except HAM1, which still needs work done on the ISI's isolation loops
• IMC is LOCKED with 2.2W input (rotation stage still needs to be calibrated)
• ISC_LOCK in READY

LOG:

After ISCT1 alignment worked wrapped up for the day, I ran a calibration sweep of the PSL rotation stage following the steps outlined in alog79596.

The measurement file, new calibration fit, and screenshot of newly accepted SDFs are attached.

TJ, Camilla, Sheila, Elenna

We went out to ISCT1 to realign all ALS paths. The baffle align scripts were successfully run for the ITMs and TMS. I moved the BS to improve the MICH alignment. We then misaligned the ITMs and went to the table.

TJ and I were able to find both green beams and the PSL red beam coming in on the periscopes. The PSL ALS beam was mostly hitting the beamdump that Sheila and Betsy had previously put on the path, but was slightly off. TJ moved the upper periscope mirror to center the green beams and the PSL beam. We got everything pretty well placed on the periscope, and then TJ improved the lower periscope green mirror to get each beam aligned onto the prism.

Sheila and I were able to get the beam aligned for the ALS X path and saw it on the camera. We moved the diode around until we got pretty good alignment. Then, I adjusted ETMX by hand to improve both the diode flashes and the camera image. At some point I hit a wall and found that moving TMSX also helped the alignment considerably. Eventually everything was well-aligned enough that I could let the ALSX guardian run through ETM TMS WFS offloaded.

I tried doing the input align with the X arm, but couldn't get LSC TR norm flashes good enough. I had to move PR2 a lot in yaw. I also tried some moves with IM4. Gave up for the day.

Meanwhile, TJ, Camilla, and Sheila touched up the ALS Y path and the PSL ALS path. The Y arm diode and camera are now well enough aligned that we could run the ALS Y guardian.

The PSL path needs more work, and currently the beam is dumped just before the SHG.

We removed all cables belonging to the analog cameras as well as a 12V power distribution box. Removed the video feedthrough panel and replaced it with a PEM feedthrough panel that previsouly was mounted on the other side.

We removed the cables associated with the 2 original in-air WFS. Removed the 2 feedthrough panels associated with the WFS.

We de-cabled the Mad City Lab PZT steering mirror, but did not remove it yet.

(CoreyG, MitchR, RandyT)

Wind Fence News

Today Location #4 (of6) had fabric panel started it was attached above the middle (so, 3 of 5 horizontal cables were secured to this panel).  The panel was then secured at this stage since the afternoon winds were beginning to pick up.  

At this point we moved to location #5 (of 6) and continued attaching the big/thick horizontal cables (bottom was installed last week, so the remaining 4 were tensioned-up/installed.  

Bee News

After this work was done, several NEW bee swarms were observed along the X-arm as we drove back to the Corner!

(Earlier this week an X-arm bee swarm was observed and a bee person installed a bee hive box; this box seems to be getting populated, but we did see some bees continuing to go into the Beam Tube at this location). 

But today, we saw (3) NEW Swarms at the base of the Beam Tube Enclosure---their swarms appeared within 2hrs!  The bees are entering at the joint between the cement enclosures. Many of the joints have holes in the cauking toward the ground and this is where the swarms were centered; as we drove back to the corner several more of these holes had smaller groups of bees investigating these holes.  Mitch went to notify Richard about the situation when we got back to the Corner Station.

An apparent 10-Hz comb at 1028, 1038, 1048... Hz was spotted while updating the lines lists. The peaks are right on integer frequencies (to within a single bin in 7200s SFTs).

I took a closer look and found that it's actually a single line jumping around in the spectrum. Anybody recognize this?

The line can also be seen in H1:PEM-CS_MAG_EBAY_LSCRACK_Z_DQ. It seems like it started coupling to DARM after the O4a/b break.

Details:

History of the line in DARM:

• 1028 Hz from 2024-03-23 through 2024-03-25
• 1058 Hz from 2024-03-26 through 2024-09-05
• 1028 Hz from 2024-09-06 through 2024-10-21
• 1038 Hz from 2024-10-22 through 2024-11-27
• 1048 Hz from 2024-11-27 through 2025-03-24
• 1068 Hz from 2025-03-25 through 2025-03-27
• 1058 Hz from 2025-03-28 through 2025-04-01

Comparison of magnetometer and strain data (y-axis for all plots is frequency; label got cut off for some reason): 

• Figures 1 and 2 show a narrow region around the 1028 Hz line. Figure 3 shows a zoom in on the early March 2024 strain plot, which is otherwise hard to see. Figures 3 and 4 show a narrow region around the 1058 Hz line.
• Interpretation: Figures 1-3 demonstrate that the line was visible in the magnetometer channel, but not in DARM, prior to March 2024. All four figures show that the artifact in DARM matches that in the magnetometer channel after March 2024.

Oli, Edgard.

On Tuesday, Oli tested the SR3 OSEM calibration factors mentioned in the comments of [LHO:84296] and summarized in [LHO:84531] and took a new suite of HAM5 ISI to SR3 M1_DAMP transfer functions (the measurements also live in /HLTS/H1/Common/Data/ and are dated for May 21st of 2025). 

The calibration factors from [LHO:84531] (taken on May 7th) featured a seemingly crazy change on the T1 OSEM calibration of 2.4539 x. So we wanted to doublecheck that the numbers actually made sense before proceeding with OSEM estimator work.

The measured SUSPOINT V to M1_DAMP_{ V , R , P } show that the calibration factor was largely correct. 

The first attachment shows the SUSPOINT V to M1_DAMP_{ V , R , P } in measured on May 7th before using the new OSEMINF gains. In it, it can be seen that there is a very clear crouss-coupling from V to R, which is mediated by the T1 OSEM in SR3. Dividing the length-to angle over the length-to-length at 10 Hz to get a sense of the cross-coupling we get 3.3 rad/m for R and 0.65 rad/m for P.

The second attachment shows the SUSPOINT V to M1_DAMP_{ V , R , P } measured on May 21st after using the new OSEMINF gains. The V to R (and to P) improves significantly with the new calibration factors. This is best seen by comparing the relative amplitude of the V to V transfer function (in red) with the V to R (in blue), and the V to P (in green), through which we get 0.4 rad/m for R and 0.1 rad/m for P. Therefore, the apparent cross-coupling has been greatly reduced, which confirms that the T1 factor was likely correct, and we can proceed with the rest of the procedure.

[NOTE: We use relative factors for the comparison, because all OSEMs were miscalibrated by a factor of 1.3-1.4, so directly comparing the amplitudes from may 7th to May 21st would be inaccurate]

These improvements are encouraging enough that we feel comfortable moving forward with the M1 OSEM calibration for SR3. To do so, Oli is hard at work rescaling the gains of the SR3 loops. We will post when that steps is ready

J. Kissel

Now that PM1, RM1, and RM2 are safely functional on the new ISI HAM1, in the h1iopsush2b front-end model, I've
    - set H1:IOP-SUS_${OPTIC}_DK_BYPASS_TIME to 600 seconds H1:IOP-SEI_HAM1_DK_BYPASS_TIME
    - set H1:IOP-SEI_HAM1_DK_BYPASS_TIME to 999999999 (~1e9) seconds, as is seemingly common in most SWWDs
    - hit RESET on each of the SUS DACKILLs and the SEI DACKILL to arm them
    - initialized the PM1 channels in the safe.snap and accepted and monitored their current values

J. Kissel, T. Shaffer

In the current O4 paradigm of SDF practice, we've minimized the number of .snap files to track by accepting the settings of some suspension whose setting don't change between "IFO down" and "Observing." That includes SUS RM1 and RM2, which live on the sushtts model -- that also now is home to PM1. RM1 and RM2 are ALIGNED at the moment, with damping loops and alignment offsets ON, and yet their settings do not show up as "different" from the safe.snap. This disagrees with the principle of "safe" but it's how we're doin it. 

As such, I've accepted PM1's settings in the ALIGNED state into the sushtts safe.snap.

TJ, Ryan C, Oli, Camilla. WP#12561

Randy had forklifted ISCT1 just outside of the cleanroom. We pushed ISCT1 back into place and checked it's location and height. Removed yellow VP covers and replaced bellows, then removed guillotines.

Oli, Edgard, Jeff, Brian

This post is meant to give a clearer explanation of the work in [LHO:84296] and its many comments. We are trying to find a new set of gains for the M1_OSEMINF filter banks for SR3 to calibrate the OSEMs to be in agreement with the HAM5 GS13s.

To do so, we drive the HAM5 ISI in { X , Y , Z } and record the response of the relevant OSEMs between 5 to 15 Hz.  At these frequencies, the M1 stage of the suspension should start to become inertial, and the M1_DAMP / SUSPOINT response of each individual OSEM should asymptote to -1, because the OSEMs would be measuring their support point on the cage [barring internal dynamics of the cage itself].

To increase the accuracy of the calibration, we use the MATLAB model of the HLTS and use the full extent of the 5-15 Hz data instead of only the asymptotic behavior.

I post here the code used to generate these results. The code requires the new Common/MatlabTools/ExportedModels folder from the SusSVN [LHO:84458]. The detailed results of the calibrations mentioned is shown below.

_____

• We took a series of transfer functions driving HAM5_ISO_{ X , Y , Z } to measure SR3_M1_DAMP_{L,T,V,R,P,Y}. The templates for this measurement are saved in the sus SVN under [HLTS/SR3/H1/Common/Data/]
  • We can see a lot of cross-coupling in some of these transfer functions. For example, the first attachment shows SUSPOINT V to M1 R cross-coupling that ends up being consistent with sensor miscalibration. This miscalibration is also seen in the large V-to-R and R-to-V couplings in the M1 to M1 transfer functions that Oli took in [LHO:83939].
• From the measurements, we reconstruct the following transfer functions:
  • SUSPOINT V to SR3_M1 T1, T2, and T3. Which are the OSEMs related to the V, R, and P degrees of freedom of SR3.
  • SUSPOINT L to SR3_M1 LF, and RT. Related to the L and Y degrees of freedom.
  • SUSPOINT T to SR3_M1 SD. Related to the T degree of freedom
• These transfer functions are shown in the second attachment. Two interesting things to note:
  • None of them asymptote to -1. In amplitude, they hover around 0.75 or so.
  • The Vertical sensors are backwards. This is not important for what we're doing, we will calibrate by using the absolute value.
• We can get the scaling factors needed to make them asymptote to one by fitting the individual OSEM transfer functions to the model.  We fit by using linear regression between 5 and 15 Hz. The scaling factors calculated from the figures in the second attachment are:
  • T1 needs to be multiplied by:   2.4539
  • T2 needs to be multiplied by:   1.4819
  • T3 needs to be multiplied by:   1.4125
  • LF needs to be multiplied by:   1.3206
  • RT needs to be multiplied by:   1.3705
  • SD needs to be multiplied by:   1.3806
• Therefore, after we multiply the OSEMINF gains that were in place at the time of measurement by these scaling factors, the new OSEMINF gains should be:   
  • T1: 3.627
  • T2: 1.396
  • T3: 1.345
  • LF: 1.719
  • RT: 1.490
  • SD:1.781
• The T1 gain is egregiously high, which makes all of us a bit nervous. Oli has been in the process of checking if these numbers actually make sense. These results will be posted in another log... This one is already too long.

Jeff, Oli

Looking into (1) from 84462.

Before this vent, although the cable pinouts were flipped for both RMs, the phase for the TFs were at 0. Now that the cables have been flipped (fixed), we are seeing that the closeout transfer functions that I took 84498 are showing that the phase for the RMs is now flipped, at 180. Additionally, both RMs are still needing the damping sign to be +1, instead of the usual -1.

Since there does still seem to be a sign issue somewhere in the sensor chain for RM2, we would have expected the 'after' transfer function phases to differ between RM1 and RM2, so it's strange that they both have switched over to 180.

I've attached the transfer functions for RM1 and RM2 comparing the after vent measurements to the last measurements we had done for them with damping loops off, which was in 2022.

TITLE: 05/22 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
OUTGOING OPERATOR: None
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: MAINTENANCE
    Wind: 11mph Gusts, 6mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.09 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY: HAM1 pumping continued overnight, but starting about 1.5 hours ago the pressure started rapidly climbing. No cause determined as of yet. VAC team has been contacted.

EDIT: Had the wrong channel trended, corrected in current attachment.