Here is how the PR3 and SR3 signals show up at various ports.

I drove a pitch line from PR3 M3 and SR3 M3 at 8.125 Hz with the ASC notches on. I was able to see at signal with a 10 ct drive on PR3 pitch and 60 ct drive on SR3 pitch.

Templates saved as {PR3,SR3}_M3_injection_all_ports.xml in /ligo/home/elenna.capote/POPX_test in case the data is useful to you.

PR3 appears strongly at REFL and POP in I and at AS in Q. SR3 appears strongly at AS in Q and POP in Q.

Will try to repeat for yaw.

Lockloss during commissioning (though not due to commissioning). Lockloss Tool

No immediately obvious cause other than first kicks being EX Osems ~86ms pre-lockloss. DARM IN1 also saw a kick ~-92ms (attached)

Keita, Rahul

We received three mirrors (JM1, 2 and 3) for the Jitter Attenuation Cavity (JAC) from CIT and were asked to characterize these mirrors before installing them in HAM1 chamber for the upcoming vent at LHO. JM1 and JM3 optics will be used in Tip Tilt supension and JM2 optic will be on a fixed mount inside the HAM1 chamber. Given below are the details of our setup and the results after characterizing them in the optics lab.

Aim of the experiment:- (a) to measure the reflectivity of the three mirrors as a function of its Angle Of Incidence (AOI) for P polarization of the input beam (1064nm laser), (b) measure the transmission of the optics at its AOI (defined in T2400360).

Experimental setup in Optics lab:- The optical layout is shown in figure1. We used a 1W 1064 nm laser (the power was reduced to 15mW approximately using a half wave plate). A polarizing beamsplitter was used to transmit P polarization waves to the steering mirror and the S polarization waves were reflected towards beam dump. The steering mirror used over here is dichroic (reflecting 1064nm light and transmitting/rejecting spurious green light emerging from the laser towards the beam dump). We used two lens to focus the input beam - one located upstream of the steering mirror and another one downstream of the same. The optic was installed on a Siskiyou mount, which was placed on a rotational stage - as shown in the picture. Thorlabs Power meter was used to measure the input, output and transmitted beam. 

Results:-

We did coarse and fine measurement to characterize the mirrors. For coarse measurement, we started at zero degree AOI (when the input beam was reflected back towards the iris) and then rotated the optic until the output power nulled - while recording the reflected power at every 5 degree interval. 

For fine measurements we set each optic at its AOI (as defined in T2400360) and then carefully measured the input, output and transmitted power. The results are given below,

FAMIS 31111

I adjusted the ISS refsignal last Tuesday to bring the diffracted power back up to around 4%, which is clearly seen in the stabilization trends in a reduction in PMC transmitted power. No other major events of note this week.

started with running scan alignment and scan SQZ ANG.  Moved filter cavity detuning to 3100 Hz

• 	UTC time	start gps time	RF6 phase (really RF3)
  SQZ (ref0)	16:45 16:50 UTC	1446828330	192.2
  mid sqz - (ref1)	16:53:30 - 16:57:30	1446828830	241
  a sqz (ref2)	17:05  -17:09 30	1446829499	237.1 (CLF +)

  Lockloss while tuning phase for the other mid sqz, we don't have a no sqz referecnce for this data set.  If someone wants to try to salvage this, a recent no sqz time is here.  

TITLE: 11/10 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 148Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 4mph Gusts, 2mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.34 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 10:07 UTC (5 hr lock)

Wind is good. Microseism is still very (very) slowly coming down.

We have planned comissioning from 8:30 and 11:30 AM PT Today.

Link to report here.

• Observing performance:
  H1 achieved an average observing duty cycle of 48.77% for the week. Operations started with several issues but showed a notable recovery toward the weekend, reaching 87.1% on Saturday and Sunday.

• Environmental disturbances:
  The main causes of lock losses were earthquake-band and wind-band motion. Three significant seismic events were recorded: a magnitude 6.0 earthquake in Russia on Tuesday, 6.6 in Japan on Sunday, and 5.7 in Mexico on Friday. Additionally, there was considerable microseismic activity throughout the week.

• Spectral features:
  Persistent violin modes were observed, particularly the fundamental around 500 Hz.

• Notable noise events:
  Tuesday exhibited multiple BNS range drops and broadband noise excess across all frequencies starting around 10 UTC. Probably related with ETMX violin mode ring-up which caused excess noise in DARM, leading to lock loss. This day also registered the highest line count of the week, reaching approximately 5000.

• Detchar tab:
  Hveto pages were not generated for the last three days of the week.
  FSCAN plots reported the lowest line count on Friday (~1900 lines) and the highest on Tuesday (~5000 lines) above treshold.

• Relevant Round Winners:

  • No winners in monday, but H1:LSC-POP_A_LF_OUT_DQ repeated 3rd place in the past 7 days.

  • Tuesday: H1:SUS-ETMX_L3_OPLEV_PIT_OUT_DQ top 1 for second time in 7 days.

Below is the summary of the DQ shift for the week from 2025-10-13 to 2025-10-19

• The average range was 150 Mpc during the first few days, and later it improved to 155 Mpc.
• Glitchgram and glitch rate were normal and comparable to the previous day, with a few exceptions.
• Some low-frequency features were visible in the strain spectrogram throughout the week.
• Earthquake band and wind band motion were the main reasons for lock loss most of the time.
• Hveto pages were not created for the last three days of the week.
• Fscan- for the whole week, the line count was below the threshold.
• The Interactive spectrum is not created throughout the week.

The full DQ shift report with day-by-day details and plots is available here.

TITLE: 11/10 Eve Shift: 0030-0600 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 145Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 5mph Gusts, 3mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.35 μm/s
SHIFT SUMMARY:
H1 Has been locked all night, for 16.5 hours now.
Everything seems to be running very smoothly. Violins looking Fantastic!
Wind forecast is perfect for observing throughout the night.
And the Secondary microseism is on the way down.

LOG:
No Log

Famis 27546 Inspect quarterly trends of HWWD bits for indication of negative function.

I believe I'm just looking for channels that have no bit switching (motion) on them, which would indicate that the HWWD is no longer working properly.

First image is how the trends display on the ndscope, it's a bit hard to see all of the channels here.
But in the second image I just scaled the channels by enough to see that there is motion on all 4 channels.
ETMX HWWD apparently has the least amount of HWWD bit switching action, but there are bits being switched.
But ETMY has been a bit busy switching bits!

TITLE: 11/10 Eve Shift: 0030-0600 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 0mph Gusts, 0mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.36 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:
H1 Has been locked for 11 hours.
Everything here looks good.... Range is on the lower side.
I'm about to run Sheila's script to change the OFI Temp   since we have had a few locks that have been above 10 hours already.
Will report back.

TITLE: 11/10 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 145Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 13:27 UTC (11 hr lock)

Microseism is very (very) slowly trending down. Wind looks good.

Only thing of note is that Cal Inj EY (H1:CAL-INJ_CW_OUTPUT) turned off for 3 minutes, which dropped us out of observing for that time (19:17 UTC to 19:30 UTC). It came back autoamtically. I found another instance of this happening in August - Ryan C's alog 86399. Tagging CAL, Tagging CDS.

LOG:

None

Closes FAMIS 27509, last checked in alog 87296

Similar results to last week with 12 T240 masses out of range compared to last month's 13. Same results for STS.

Averaging Mass Centering channels for 10 [sec] ...
2025-11-09 13:18:07.263464

There are 12 T240 proof masses out of range ( > 0.3 [V] )!
ETMX T240 2 DOF X/U = -1.566 [V]
ETMX T240 2 DOF Y/V = -1.576 [V]
ETMX T240 2 DOF Z/W = -0.951 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF X/U = -2.22 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.466 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF X/U = -2.34 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF X/U = -1.07 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF Z/W = -2.835 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF Y/V = -0.353 [V]
BS T240 3 DOF Z/W = -0.431 [V]
HAM8 1 DOF Y/V = -0.453 [V]
HAM8 1 DOF Z/W = -0.761 [V]

All other proof masses are within range ( < 0.3 [V] ):
ETMX T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.034 [V]
ETMX T240 1 DOF Y/V = -0.086 [V]
ETMX T240 1 DOF Z/W = -0.1 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF X/U = -0.076 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF Y/V = -0.11 [V]
ETMX T240 3 DOF Z/W = -0.091 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.014 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.16 [V]
ETMY T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.21 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF X/U = -0.092 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.195 [V]
ETMY T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.002 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF X/U = 0.224 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF Y/V = 0.012 [V]
ETMY T240 3 DOF Z/W = 0.116 [V]
ITMX T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.26 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.16 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.256 [V]
ITMX T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.217 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF Y/V = 0.098 [V]
ITMX T240 3 DOF Z/W = 0.103 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF X/U = 0.051 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF Y/V = 0.108 [V]
ITMY T240 1 DOF Z/W = -0.026 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.018 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.216 [V]
ITMY T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.118 [V]
ITMY T240 3 DOF Y/V = 0.068 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF X/U = -0.106 [V]
BS T240 1 DOF Z/W = 0.149 [V]
BS T240 2 DOF X/U = 0.063 [V]
BS T240 2 DOF Y/V = 0.147 [V]
BS T240 2 DOF Z/W = 0.037 [V]
BS T240 3 DOF X/U = -0.176 [V]
BS T240 3 DOF Y/V = -0.29 [V]
HAM8 1 DOF X/U = -0.23 [V]

Assessment complete.
Averaging Mass Centering channels for 10 [sec] ...

2025-11-09 13:18:19.262567
There are 2 STS proof masses out of range ( > 2.0 [V] )!
STS EY DOF X/U = -4.593 [V]
STS EY DOF Z/W = 2.266 [V]

All other proof masses are within range ( < 2.0 [V] ):
STS A DOF X/U = -0.436 [V]
STS A DOF Y/V = -0.917 [V]
STS A DOF Z/W = -0.49 [V]
STS B DOF X/U = 0.167 [V]
STS B DOF Y/V = 0.938 [V]
STS B DOF Z/W = -0.364 [V]
STS C DOF X/U = -0.708 [V]
STS C DOF Y/V = 0.764 [V]
STS C DOF Z/W = 0.522 [V]
STS EX DOF X/U = -0.201 [V]
STS EX DOF Y/V = -0.136 [V]
STS EX DOF Z/W = 0.122 [V]
STS EY DOF Y/V = 1.246 [V]
STS FC DOF X/U = 0.188 [V]
STS FC DOF Y/V = -1.118 [V]
STS FC DOF Z/W = 0.629 [V]

Assessment complete.
 

Closes FAMIS 27538, last checked in alog 87902

Laser Status:
    NPRO output power is 1.85W
    AMP1 output power is 70.63W
    AMP2 output power is 139.9W
    NPRO watchdog is GREEN
    AMP1 watchdog is GREEN
    AMP2 watchdog is GREEN
    PDWD watchdog is GREEN

PMC:
    It has been locked 9 days, 23 hr 29 minutes
    Reflected power = 24.68W
    Transmitted power = 106.3W
    PowerSum = 131.0W

FSS:
    It has been locked for 0 days 8 hr and 51 min
    TPD[V] = 0.5364V

ISS:
    The diffracted power is around 4.2%
    Last saturation event was 0 days 8 hours and 53 minutes ago

Possible Issues:
    PMC reflected power is high

Sun Nov 09 10:01:51 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 1min 50secs

Very quick fill today, discharge line pressure was above nominal in the hour preceding the fill.

TITLE: 11/09 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 145Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 4mph Gusts, 2mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.43 μm/s 
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 13:27 UTC

Wind looks good. Microseism still high.

08:14 UTC lockloss from a 6.6 from Japan,

08:23 ETMY and TMSY SUS and ISI watchdogs tripped.

08:33 UTC ETMY HEPI WD tripped

I untripped SUS, put it in DAMPED, untripped the ISI then lastly the HEPI.

The test system for 4k Ethernet was moved from EY to EX, ending the test at EY.  

The link was tested between the MSR and EX at 100G for a short itme.  The link tested at 80G, the maximum the software can test.

The link is now being tested long-term at 25G.  So far, no issues.

Earlier log entry about test at EY https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=87811

M. Todd, S. Dwyer

As derived in previous alogs, we are able to relate the HOM spacing observed in each arm to the surface defocus of the test masses -- which is a combination of self-heating and ring heater power (ignoring CO2 affects on the ITM RoC). From the fits we've made of the HOM spacing / surface defocus change as a function of ring heater power we can get a value for the ring heater to surface defocus coupling factor.

Theoretically from this we should be able to solve for the self heating contribution in the test masses as well -- allowing us to constrain things like the coupling of absorbed power to surface defocus at the ITMs if we assume to know the arm power and absorption values (from HWS).

Upper Limits

If we assume no absorption in ETMs (obviously not physical), and we assume the HWS values for the ITM absorptions are correct, then with a HOM spacing measurement from each arm we can get an upper limit of the coupling factor of self-heating to surface defocus for each ITM (they shouldn't be different but this is a good exercise).

Assuming alpha is the absorption coefficient, i subscript is for the ITM, and x/y is which arm. P_y,i_rh is the itmy ring-heater. G-factors are the product of ITM and ETM g-factors. Then from the formula in section 1.2 of the notes file : Gy = Gyc - B*L*gyic*(Pyerh+Pyirh) - L*(Ai*alpha_yi*Pyarm*gyec + beta*Ai*alpha_e*Pyarm*gyic), we can solve for Ai which is the coupling factor of self-heating to surface defocus.

Middling Values

If we assume quoted absorption in ETMs (measured by LIGO, on galaxy), and we assume the HWS values for the ITM absorptions are correct, then with a HOM spacing measurement from each arm we can get a more realistic value of the coupling factor of self-heating to surface defocus for each ITM (they shouldn't be different but this is a good exercise).

Assuming alpha is the absorption coefficient, i subscript is for the ITM, and x/y is which arm. P_y,i_rh is the itmy ring-heater. G-factors are the product of ITM and ETM g-factors. Then from the formula in the notes file : Gy = Gyc - B*L*gyic*(Pyerh+Pyirh) - L*(Ai*alpha_yi*Pyarm*gyec + beta*Ai*alpha_e*Pyarm*gyic), we can solve for Ai which is the coupling factor of self-heating to surface defocus.

Summary

Both of these values indicate there is certainly an overestimation of the self-heating impact on surface defocus.

For reference, the current TCS-SIM values for this coupling factor are Ai_y = Ai_x = -36.5 uD/W.   More examination is required into this.

Links to previous alogs:

1. Estimating HOM spacing shift from self-heating alone:  https://alog.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/aLOG/index.php?callRep=84172