Displaying reports 1401-1420 of 83163.Go to page Start 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 End
Reports until 16:00, Tuesday 29 April 2025
H1 General
ryan.crouch@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:00, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84167)
OPS Tuesday day shift summary

TITLE: 04/29 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Planned Engineering
INCOMING OPERATOR: None
SHIFT SUMMARY: We had a few earthquakes roll through in the morning, 6.8 from south of New Zealand and a 4.8 from Puerto Rico. The LVEA is now in LAZER HAZARD.
LOG:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            

Start Time System Name Location Lazer_Haz Task Time End
14:20 FAC Kim & Nellie LVEA N Tech clean, in at 14:20 15:25
15:35 ISC Betsy, Camilla LVEA N Parts/tools search 15:46
15:48 FAC Kim & Nellie EndY, then X N Tech clean 17:28
15:50 SUS Rahul, Betsy LVEA N RM2 work 16:27
15:54 FAC Eric LVEA N Help with clean room move, BSC8 17:22
15:55 IAS Jason LVEA N Retreive FARO 15:58
15:55 VAC Jordan LVEA N Purge air checks 16:04
15:56 FAC Tyler LVEA N Cleanroom move (BSC8), scissor lifts, Craning 17:49
16:10 VAC Gerardo LVEA N Join HAM1 crew 16:27
16:51 EE Fil, Ken LVEA N -> Y HAM4/5 cable tray work 21:36
17:11 PEM Sabby Arms, site N Collect flags around site 20:02
17:12 VAC Gerardo LVEA N Take septum cover off 18:02
17:13 ISC Camilla LVEA N Help with septum covers 18:33
17:16 EE Marc LVEA N Check Chassis, check upgrades 17:36
17:20 VAC Jordan MidX N LN2 pump 17:47
17:36 EE Marc EX, EY, MY n Looking for parts + grabbing serial numbers 18:51
17:37 FAC Eric Fire pump room n Running fire pumps 18:05
17:46 SUS Rahul LVEA N HAM1 work, move curtains 18:22
17:47   Mike LVEA N Check out/in with HAM1 18:35
17:54 FAC Christina Receiving N Moving stuff and trash 19:39
17:55 ISC TJ LVEA N Look for tubing 18:41
18:00 FAC Kim & Nellie LVEA N Tech clean, Kim out at 18:42 19:10
18:18 ISC Betsy & RyanS LVEA n Inpect CR and boxes 18:33
18:27 ISC Ibrahim LVEA N Join Betsy and RyanS 18:33
18:49 FIT Ibrahim Yarm N Brisk walk 19:52
19:31 EE Ken LVEA N -> Y Roll up high bay door 20:36
19:20 CAL Tony PCAL lab N PCAL work, in at 19:20 19:40
19:49 OPS TJ LVEA N -> Y Hazard transition 19:56
19:58 ISC Keita LVEA Y IOTL2 work 20:44
19:59 ISC Camilla LVEA Y Join Keita 20:37
20:02 FAC Tyler LVEA Y Bring bangbox from lVEA to staging 20:11
20:02 ISC Sheila LVEA Y Join IOTL2 crew 20:36
18:15 FAC Randy, Jim, Mitch EndY N Wind fence 21:24
20:43 CAL Tony, Francisco EndY Y End station measurement 22:49
21:52 ISC Elenna, Sheila, Camilla LVEA Y HAM1 ISC work 23:45
21:59 VAC Jordan LVEA Y Grab parts 22:11
22:08 VAC Gerardo LVEA Y See whats needed to decomis HAM2 oplev 22:16
22:24 SEI Jim LVEA Y Look for parts and such, klapton 22:37
22:38 SEI Jim Ends, Mids N Parts search Ongoing
22:49 CAL Tony PCAL lab LOCAL FInish end station measurement Ongoing
22:53 CAL Rick, Dripta PCAL lab LOCAL Checks Ongoing
22:53 SAF Richard LVEA Y Safety checks 23:00

Some of the work today includes:

H1 SUS (SUS)
rahul.kumar@LIGO.ORG - posted 14:06, Tuesday 29 April 2025 - last comment - 15:56, Tuesday 29 April 2025(84178)
HAM1 vent work - report on SUS RM1 and RM2

Continued from LHO alog 84128.

RM1 (Tip Tilt suspension)

Last week Daniel and I replaced the original TT bosem cable (with a new 25in long, D2100049 S/N 2200358) since the original cable was having issues with grounding. However, Betsy informed us that the new cable might have pin 1 missing (and should be sent back to CIT for repair). I inspected the cable in-chamber and found pin1 missing.

Hence, I replaced the 25in long D2100049 S/N 2200358 (missing pin 1) with 54in long D2100049 s/n S2100426 cable. However, the ground loop issues has now returned (shorting with the chamber itself) and it looks like the culprit is not the cable but the bosem itself (despite having kapton tape for shielding, clearly its not enough). I am still considering to slide a kapton sheet underneath RM1.

Also, I measured the Open light counts of all four bosems for RM1 and they are listed below,

OLC for RM1 bosems offsets gain
UL = 21613 -10806 1.38
LL = 22400 -11200 1.33
UR = 12380 -6190 2.42
LR = 16473 -8236 1.82

 

RM2 (Tip Tilt suspension)

Kissel, Betsy, Rahul

Here, Jeff suspects that the bosem magnet polarity is incorrect (i.e is not as per E1400316) which was recorded in his LHO alog from 2018. To verify Jeff's claim we went back into the chamber to check the polarity of RM2 magnets. However we faced two problems over here. At first I looked into the Tip Tilt assembly drawing and then the Tip Tilt PEEK flags in Triples lab to locate the magnet inside the flag. It turns out that the magnet is buried deep inside the PEEK flag, such that my polarity tester cannot detect its presence. Hence, I took another strong magnet to check if its pulling or repelling it - which worked fine. The second problem we faced was that the PEEK flag are a very tight fit inside the TT mirror holder (in-chamber) and despite our best efforts (both Betsy and I tried unscrewing it) we couldn't remove it for checking. Hence, we were unsuccessful in measuring the magnet polarity and after some discussion we decided to move ahead and reset RM2 (digitally) to how it was before this vent. Jeff will file an FRS ticket regarding this issue.

The Open light counts for RM2 is given below,

OLC for RM2 bosems offsets gain
UL = 15800 -7900 1.89
LL = 20048 -10024 1.49
UR = 16753 -8376 1.79
LR = 21173 -10586 1.41

 

I have accepted the SDFs for both RM1 and RM2 and three screenshots are attached below.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
rahul.kumar@LIGO.ORG - 14:06, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84180)

RM1 still needs a cable table bracket.

rahul.kumar@LIGO.ORG - 15:43, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84182)SUS

The first set of transfer function measurement results for both RM1 and RM2 are shown in the attachments below (screenshots for all three L, P, Y degrees of freedom). I am not happy with the coherence in RM1 and still working on improving it. I am also planning on taking osem spectra to analyze the noise levels in bosems (considering that their OLC have degraded considerably).

RM1 Transfer function templates:-

/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HTTS/H1/RM1/SAGM1/Data

2025-04-29_2330_H1SUSRM1_M1_WhiteNoise_L_0p01to50Hz.xml
2025-04-29_2330_H1SUSRM1_M1_WhiteNoise_P_0p01to50Hz.xml
2025-04-29_2330_H1SUSRM1_M1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p01to50Hz.xml

 

RM2 Transfer function templates:-

/ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HTTS/H1/RM2/SAGM1/Data

2025-04-29_2300_H1SUSRM2_M1_WhiteNoise_L_0p01to50Hz.xml
2025-04-29_2300_H1SUSRM2_M1_WhiteNoise_P_0p01to50Hz.xml
2025-04-29_2300_H1SUSRM2_M1_WhiteNoise_Y_0p01to50Hz.xml

Images attached to this comment
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 15:56, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84183)

Here's an ndscope of April 24th, the first day that we put RM1 and RM2 back in, to hopefully make stuff slightly less confusing.

After installation, we had checked the open light values for RM1 and updated the OFFSETs (green) before realizing that the ADC count signs on (almost) all the OSEMs had been flipped to positive, whereas previously they had been negative (a result of changing the In-Air to SatAmp cable for both RMs: 84027). We flipped them after realizing this, which then fixed the OSEMINF OUT values (cyan). Throughout this, we also had just left RM1's UL OSEM as it was since it was behaving strangely and was the only OSEM to still be reading in negative ADC counts. At the point of the pink cursor, troubleshooting was started for RM1 UL.

Images attached to this comment
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 15:42, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84184)ISC, SUS
Some additions to this aLOG:
- D2100049 is an in-vac quadrapus cable. So the swaps that he's talking about in the above aLOG are *seperate* from the in-air cable swap for RM1 and RM2 that's discussed in LHO:84027

- It's LHO:40853 (indeed, Mar 2018) where I identify that RM2 alone, out of all the remaining tip-tilts in the IFO has it's magnet polarities flipped. I had guessed this was true because the damping loops required a different sign that the other tip-tilts if I had the COILOUTF settings per T1200015 convention.
H1 CDS
jonathan.hanks@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:34, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84177)
WP 12467 Connecting the new HPI pump controller to the CDS network
Today, Dave and I did the final bit of WP 12467.  We connected a monitor and keyboard and configured the networking on h1hpipumpctrlcs, which is the new hpi beckhoff controller for the corner station.  Filiberto had done the physical link to the CDS switch earlier.  We were able to share the monitor with the old control computer as the new and old systems had different video connectors, but there is a new keyboard for the new computer.  If anyone needs to work on it, we need to get a usb mouse out there as well.

Now that it is on the network Patrick can remotely access and start programming the new controller.

At this point there is nothing hooked up for it to control.
LHO VE (ISC)
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:57, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84175)
Removed two spectrum window covers from HAM1, ready for beam alignment.

Gerardo, Camilla, WP 12491

Removed two septum window covers in HAM1: the outgoing PSL beam and return REFL beam covers. 
The covers were placed in the chamber, on the -X side on the floor. Photos attached. 

Also fixed the LSC POP helicoil so all diodes are now cabled, details in 84174

Images attached to this report
LHO FMCS
eric.otterman@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:12, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84173)
Monthly fire pump test
The monthly fire pump test was conducted this morning. Water was only churned per NFPA requirements. Each pump was run for ten minutes. The jockey pump and fire pump 1 were started via simulated pressure drop on the supply line, fire pump 2 was manually started. 
H1 SUS (SEI, SUS)
edgard.bonilla@LIGO.ORG - posted 12:02, Tuesday 29 April 2025 - last comment - 14:56, Monday 05 May 2025(84171)
SR3 OSEM estimator update

Edgard, Oli.

Follow up to the work summarized in 84012 and 84041.

TL;DR: Oli tested the estimator on Friday and found the ISI state affects the stability of the scheme, plus a gain error in my fits from 84041. The two issues were corrected and the intended estimator drives look normal (promising, even) now. The official test will happen later, depending on HAM1 suspension work.

____

Oli tested the OSEM estimator damping on SR3 on Friday and immediately found two issues to debug:

1) [See first attachment] The ISI state for the first test that Oli ran was DAMPED. Since the estimator was created with the ISI in ISOLATED (and it is intended to be used in that state), the system went unstable. This issue is exacerbated by point 2) below. This means that we need to properly manage the interaction of the estimator with guardian and any watchdogs to ensure the estimator is never engaged if the ISI trips.

2) [See second attachment] There was a miscalibration of the fits I originally imported to the front-end. This resulted in large drives when using the estimator path. In the second figure, there are three conditions for the yaw damping of SR3:
           ( t < -6 min )          OSEM damping with gain of -0.1.
    ( -6 min<  t  < -2 min)   OSEM damping with a gain of -0.5, split between the usual damping path and the estimator path.
     ( -2 min < t < 0 min)     OSEM + Estimator damping.

The top left corner plot shows the observed motion from every path. It can be seen that M1_YAW_DAMP_EST_IN1 (the input to the estimator damping filters) is orders of magnitude larger than M1_DAMP_IN1 (the imput to the regular OSEM damping filters).

The issue was that I fit and exported the transfer functions in SI units, [m/m] for the suspoint to M1, and [m/N] for M1 to M1. I didn't export the calibration factors to convert to [um/nm] and [um/drive_cts], respectively.

____

I fixed this issue on Friday. Updated the files in /sus/trunk/HLTS/Common/FilterDesign/Estimator/  to add a calibration filter module to the two estimator paths (a factor of 0.001 for suspoint to M1, and 1.5404 for M1 to M1). The changes are current as of revision 12288 of the sus svn.

The third attachment shows the intended drives from the estimator and OSEM-only paths. They look similar enough that we believe the miscalibration issue has been resolved. For now we stand by until there is a chance to test the scheme again.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
oli.patane@LIGO.ORG - 13:40, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84179)

I've finished the set of test measurements for this latest set of filter files (where we now have the calibration filters in)
These tests were done with HAM5 in ISOLATED

Test 1: Baseline; classic damping w/ gain of Y to -0.1(I took this measurement after the other two tests)
start: 04/29/2025 19:22:05 UTC
end: 04/29/2025 20:31:00 UTC

Test 2: Classic damping w/ gain of Y to -0.1, OSEM Damp Y -0.4
start: 04/29/2025 17:16:00 UTC
end: 04/29/2025 18:18:00 UTC

Test 3: Classic damping w/ gain of Y to -0.1, EST Damp Y -0.4
start: 04/29/2025 18:18:05 UTC
end: 04/29/2025 19:22:00 UTC

Now that we have the calibration in, it looks like there is a decrease in the noise seen between damping with the osems vs using the estimator.

In the plot I've attached, the first half shows Test 2 and the second half shows Test 3

Images attached to this comment
edgard.bonilla@LIGO.ORG - 16:21, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84185)

I analyzed the output of the tests for us to compare.

1) First attachment shows the damping of the Yaw modes as seen by the optical lever in SR3. We can see that the estimator is reducing the motion of the 2 Hz and 3 Hz frequency modes. This is most easily seen by flicking through pages 8-10 of the .pdf attached. The first mode's Q factor is higher than OSEM only damping at -0.5 gain, but it is lower than if we kept a -0.1 gain.

2) The second attachment shows that we get this by adding less noise at higher frequencies. From 5 Hz onwards, we have less drive going to the M1 Yaw actuators, which is a good sign. There is a weird bump around 5 Hz that I cannot explain. It could be an artifact of the complementary filters that I'm not understanding, or it could be an artifact of using a 16Hz channel to observe these transfer functions.

Considering that the fits were made on Friday while the chamber was being evacuated and that the suspension had not thermalized, I think this is a success. The Optical lever is seeing less motion in the 1-5 Hz band consistent with expectations (see, for example some of the error plots in 84004), with the exception of the 1Hz resonance. We expect this error to be mitigated by performing a fit with the suspension thermalized.

Some things of note:

- We could perform an "active" measurement of the estimator's performance by driving the ISI during the next round of measurements. We don't even have to use it in loop, just observe M1_YAW_EST_DAMP_IN1_DQ, and compare it with M1_DAMP_IN1_DQ.
The benefit would be to get a measurement of the 'goodness of fit' that we can use as part of a noise budget.


- We should investigate the 5 Hz 'bump' in the drive. While the total drive does not exceed the value for OSEM-only damping, I want to rule out the presence of any weird poles or zeros that could interact negatively with other loops.

 

Images attached to this comment
Non-image files attached to this comment
edgard.bonilla@LIGO.ORG - 09:42, Thursday 01 May 2025 (84219)SEI, SUS

Attached you can see a comparison between predicted and measured drives for two of the conditions of this test. The theoretical predictions are entirely made using the MATLAB model for the suspension and assume that the OSEM noise is the main contributor to the drive spectrum. Therefore, they are hand-fit to the correct scale, and they might miss effects related to the gain miscalibration of the SR3 OSEMs shown in the fit in 84041 [note that the gain of the ISI to M1 transfer function asymptotes to 0.75 OSEM m/ GS13 m, as opposed to 1 m/m].

In the figure we can see that the theoretical prediction for the OSEM-only damping (with a gain of -0.5) is fairly accurate at predicting the observed drive for this condition. The observed feature at 5 Hz is related to the shape of the controller, which is well captured by our model for the normal M1 damping loops (classic loop).

In the same figure, we can see that the expected estimator drive is similarly well captured (at least in shape) by the theoretical prediction. Unfortunately, we predict the controller-related peaking to be at 4 Hz instead of the observed 5 Hz. Brian and I are wary that it could mean we are sensitive to small changes in the plant. The leading hypothesis right now is that it is related to the phase loss we have in the M1 to M1 transfer function that is not captured by the model.

The next step is to test this hypothesis by using a semi-empirical model instead of a fully theoretical one.

Images attached to this comment
edgard.bonilla@LIGO.ORG - 14:56, Monday 05 May 2025 (84260)SEI, SUS

We were able to explain the drive observed in the tests after accounting for two differences not included in the modelling:

1) The gain of the damping loop loaded into Foton is different from the most recent ones documented in the sus SVN:
sus/trunk/HLTS/Common/FilterDesign/MatFiles/dampingfilters_HLTS_H1SR3_20bitDACs_H1HAM5ISI_nosqrtLever_2022-10-31.mat
They differ by a factor of 28 or so, which does not seem consistent with a calibration error of any sort. But since it is not documented into the .mat files makes it difficult to analyze without ourtright having the filters currently in foton.

2) There was spurious factor of 12.3 on the measured M1 to M1 transfer function due to gains in the SR3_M1_TEST filter bank ( documented in 84259 ). This factor means that our SR3 M1 to M1 fit was wrong by the same factor, the real transfer function is 12 times smaller than the measured one, and in turn, than our fit.

After we account for those two erroneous factors, our expected drive matches the observed drive [see attached figure]. The low frequency discrepancy is entirely because we overestimate the OSEM sensor noise at low frequencies [see G2002065 for an HSTS example of the same thing]. Therefore, we have succeeded at modelling the observed drives, and can move on to trying the estimator for real.

_____

Next steps:
- Recalibrate the SR3 OSEMs (remembering to compensate the gain of the M1_DAMP and the estimator damping loops)
- Remeasure the ISI and M1 Yaw to M1 Yaw transfer functions
- Fit and try the estimator for real

Images attached to this comment
LHO VE
jordan.vanosky@LIGO.ORG - posted 11:24, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84170)
Morning Purge Air Checks 4-29-25

Morning dry air skid checks, water pump, kobelco, drying towers all nominal.

Dew point measurement at HAM1 , approx. -43C

Images attached to this report
LHO VE
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 10:10, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84169)
Tue CP1 Fill

Tue Apr 29 10:04:37 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 4min 34secs

 

Images attached to this report
H1 CDS
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - posted 08:09, Tuesday 29 April 2025 - last comment - 08:11, Tuesday 29 April 2025(84164)
DTS ENV EPICS IOC froze when x1dtslogin was rebooted

FRS33974

Following this morning's reboot of x1dtslogin, the EPICS IOC reporting the H2 building DTS environment channels froze with its last values instead of crashing. After 10 minutes this was reported on the main DTS MEDM with a red banner showing a stuck GPS time, but this was not reflected on the CDS Overview.

I have modified DTS.adl, which is used by the CDS overview, to show a red flag if the GPS time stops updating. Attachment shows the new flag and a trend of the DTS air flow channel showing the freeze which started at 07:33 Tue 29apr2025

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
david.barker@LIGO.ORG - 08:11, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84165)

dts_tunnel.service and dts_env.service were restarted on cdsioc0 at 08:04 to clear this error.

H1 ISC
camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - posted 16:26, Monday 28 April 2025 - last comment - 12:51, Tuesday 29 April 2025(84155)
SLED installed in HAM1 and most Diodes Cabled

Oli, Camilla.

Following work done in 84115 to repopulate HAM1 with some optical components, today Oli and I placed the SLED in position and placed all the diodes, most (not LSC POP A ) are cabled. Photos taken from -Y side and +Y side attached.

Apart from LSC POP A, they are all cabled up according to the cables in D1000313 BOM googlesheet. LSC POP A has a heli-coil that needs replacing before we can install the RF cable so neither cable are currently installed. ASC REFL A and B are in the incorrect position to allow for beam profiling before moving the the final position. LSC REFL A and B may need to be moved slightly but we need more of the correct size dog clamps to allow that. 

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
corey.gray@LIGO.ORG - 09:49, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84168)EPO

Tagging EPO for HAM1 table photos.

camilla.compton@LIGO.ORG - 12:51, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84174)

Rahul, Gerado, Camilla 

We pulled the old helicoil and installed a new shorter helicoil into LSC POP A. All diode cables are now connected.

As we were running low on dog clamps, I swapped the bases of L2, M10 nd M12 to longer D1200683 mounting bases so that we can use the dog clamps where needed. Photos attached.

Images attached to this comment
H1 SUS
daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - posted 11:13, Friday 25 April 2025 - last comment - 16:11, Tuesday 29 April 2025(84123)
RM1/RM2/PM1

Some changes to the RM1/RM2/PM1:

All other things equal the local damping loops should have the correct sign now. Thic change will also require a sign change in the ASC centering servos.

Comments related to this report
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 16:11, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84186)
"Yes, and..."
- It makes sense to zero the ALIGNMENT offsets for RM1, RM2, and PM1. They're physically aligning the optics in chamber this week, so we don't want to get confused by having digital offsets driven out to the coils.

- Daniel says "Changed the signs of the coil outputs for RM1 and RM2. This should account for the sign change of the OSEM voltages."
Here, "the change in sign of the OSEM voltages" means the fixing of the "has been like that forever as far as we can tell" issue that the RM1 and RM2 OSEM PD sensor readback's ADC voltage had been negative when under light. The fix was in the in-air DB25 feedthru to satamp cable; see LHO:84027 and subsequent comment about the differences in satellite amplifiers.

He acknowledges that this fix will disrupt the overall sign of the damping loops, so he just *picked* a place to flip the sign. 
He chose the COILOUTF banks, but
    . we use these banks to explicitly compensate for the magnet polarity, and 
    . RM1 and RM2 have already confirmed to be different in this regard in Mar 2018; see LHO:40853 -- and in that aLOG we concluded it was RM2 that was abnormal because RM2 required a different damping loop gain than RM1, OM1, OM2, and OM3 when all *settings* were otherwise the same.
    . HOWEVER given that the OSEM sensor readback itself had a negative in it, I'm no longer convinced it's RM2 that's the problem. But at least we know they're different.
    . I tried to have Betsy/Rahul go in chamber to confirm magnet polarity but these HTTS magnets are particularly hard to get at / measure, given that they're buried within the flag and the PEEK flag can no longer be unscrewed from the aluminum optic holder; see LHO:84178
So, since we're left stuck not understanding the coil actuator magnet polarity, I *don't* want to fix the *sensor* sign here. 
We've reverted the above change of COILOUTF signs. They're now restored to 

 $ caget H1:SUS-RM1_M1_COILOUTF_UL_GAIN H1:SUS-RM1_M1_COILOUTF_LL_GAIN H1:SUS-RM1_M1_COILOUTF_UR_GAIN H1:SUS-RM1_M1_COILOUTF_LR_GAIN
H1:SUS-RM1_M1_COILOUTF_UL_GAIN 1
H1:SUS-RM1_M1_COILOUTF_LL_GAIN -1
H1:SUS-RM1_M1_COILOUTF_UR_GAIN -1
H1:SUS-RM1_M1_COILOUTF_LR_GAIN 1

$ caget H1:SUS-RM2_M1_COILOUTF_UL_GAIN H1:SUS-RM2_M1_COILOUTF_LL_GAIN H1:SUS-RM2_M1_COILOUTF_UR_GAIN H1:SUS-RM2_M1_COILOUTF_LR_GAIN
H1:SUS-RM2_M1_COILOUTF_UL_GAIN -1
H1:SUS-RM2_M1_COILOUTF_LL_GAIN 1
H1:SUS-RM2_M1_COILOUTF_UR_GAIN 1
H1:SUS-RM2_M1_COILOUTF_LR_GAIN -1

- He's confirming our work on PM1 from LHO:83293

- 2025-04-29, Daniel has made the model changes in h1sushtts, but they've not yet been installed as this is a trivial top-level model change that has been there forever, and is blocked from reaching the DAC by just turning of the SUS-RM*_ISCINF_L bank inputs.

- We'll re-address the damping loop signs once the dust settles with chamber work.
H1 AOS
daniel.sigg@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:07, Monday 21 April 2025 - last comment - 15:52, Tuesday 29 April 2025(84027)
OSEM reabacks for RMs

Fil Marc Daniel

We noticed that the photodiode pins of the in-air cable that connects to RM1 and RM2 were flipped. This will flip cathode and anode which will only matter if there is a bias applied.

Going thru the schematics it seems that with 1:1 wiring the PD anode and cathode are flipped compared to what is shown in Sat Amp D080276. I assume somebody noticed this and flipped the corresponding pins of the in-air cable to correct for it back in 2013.  The polarity of the PD doesn't really matter, if there is no bias. We checked the RM sat amps and they have no bias.

If the Sat Amp PDs are connected as shown om D080276, the OSEM values will be negative. Indeed, the RMs had negative OSEM values as expected. However, all ZMs have positive values, since nobody bothered to flip the pins. We propose to no longer flip the PD pins for the RMs and work with positive OSEM values in the future.

Comments related to this report
jeffrey.kissel@LIGO.ORG - 15:52, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84176)CDS, ISC, SUS, SYS
J. Kissel

First, supporting Daniel's findings that the RM1 and RM2 HTTS OSEM sensor readbacks have been incorrectly negative for ages, I attach a trend of the OSEM ADC input values (and OSEMINF OFFSETS and GAINs) back to 2017.

Not said explicitly in the above aLOG -- Daniel / Fil / Marc installed fresh new DB25 Sat Amp to Vac Feedthru cables (D2100464) just after this aLOG as a part of cabling up the new signal chain for PM1. These cables are one-to-one pin-for-pin cables so it *should* have played no role in the sign of the sensors or how they're connected. 

However, it's now obvious that RM1 and RM2 have had the ADC input voltages as negative for a *very* long time. 

I reviewed the signal chains for the OSEM PDs; see G2500980.

The RMs are using a US 8CH satamps D1002818 / D080276.

I attach a screen-cap of page 4, which highlights that 
    - UK 4CH satamps D0900900 / D0901284 use 
        . a negative reverse bias configuration, with
        . anode connected to bias and cathode connected to the negative input of the TIA, and
        . an inverting differential amplifier stage
    - US 8CH satamps D1002818 / D080276 use 
        . a positive reverse bias configuration, with 
        . cathode connected to the bias and anode connected to the negative input of the TIA, and [hence the apparent "pin-flip" from the other two satamp types]
        . a non-inverting differential amplifier stage
    - US 4CH satamps D1900089 / D1900217use 
        . a negative reverse bias configuration, with
        . cathode connected to the bias and anode connected to the negative input of the TIA, and
        . a non-inverting differential amplifier stage [hence the overall "sign flip" from the other two]

I disagree with Daniel that "the polarity of the PD" i.e. how the anode and cathode are connected to the transimpedance amplifier.
All versions of the PD pinout + SatAmp configure the system in a reverse bias, be it negative or positive. 
In these configurations, even in a zero bias configuration, photocurrent always flows from from cathode to anode as light impinges on the PD. 
So if the anode is hooked up to the negative input of the transimpedance amp (as in D1002818), that signal will have a different sign than if the cathode is hooked up to the negative input (as in D0900900 and D1900089).

The RMs should have their *positive* bias from the D080276 circuit applied.
In 2011, we'd agreed in G1100856 to jumper all OSEM satamps to the "L" position, a.k.a. the LIGO OSEM a.k.a. AOSEM position, which uses a bias voltage and is thus in photo conductive or pc mode. This is mostly because we wanted to not have to think about keeping track of which satamps are jumpered and which are not, but also because the BOSEM PD didn't mind have a bias, even though it was designed to have no bias.

Given the "thought of 2nd to last, last, and never" history of the RMs as they traversed subsystem from ISC to SUS circa O1, moving from the ASC front-end to a SUS front-end circa O2, then never really appearing in wiring diagrams until O3, etc. it wouldn't surprise me if the RMs didn't get the memo to put the bias jumper in the "L" position jumpering pins 2 and 3.

I disagree with Daniel: only the US 4CH satamp D1900089 / D1900217 should read negative with light on it.

So, my guess is that that someone "in 2013" (i.e. during aLIGO install prior to O1) didn't understand these subtleties between the UK 4CH and US 8CH satamp, saw the "different from UK 4CH satamp" and tried fixing the pins of the in-air D25 from satamp to vacuum flange.

Regardless, the new cable has cleared up the issue, and ADC voltage from RM1 and RM2 is now positive.
Images attached to this comment
H1 DetChar (DetChar)
ansel.neunzert@LIGO.ORG - posted 15:08, Thursday 23 January 2025 - last comment - 15:07, Wednesday 07 May 2025(82320)
Relationship between violin mode height and narrow spectral artifact contamination, revisited

Summary

Q: What is the relationship between the strength of violin mode ring-ups and the number of narrow spectral artifacts around the violin modes? Is there a clear cut-off at which the contamination begins?

A: The answer depends on the time period analyzed. There was an unusual time period spanning from mid-June 2023 through (very approximately) August 2023. During this time period, the number lines during ring-ups was much greater than in the rest of O4, and the appearance of the contamination may have begun at lower violin mode amplitudes.

What to keep in mind when looking at the plots.

1. These plots use the Fscan line count in a 200-Hz band around each violin mode region, which is a pretty rough metric, and not good for picking up small variations in the line count. It's the best we've got at the moment, and it can show big-picture changes. But on some days, contamination is present, but only in the form of ~10 narrow lines symmetrically arranged around a high violin mode peak. (Example in the last figure, fig 7) This small jump in the line count may not show up above the usual fluctuations. However, in aggregate (over all of O4) this phenomenon does become an issue for CW data quality. These "slight contamination" cases are also particularly important for answering the question "at what violin mode amplitude does the contamination just start to emerge?" In short, we shouldn't put too much faith in this method for locating a cut-off problematic violin mode height.

2. The violin modes may not be the only factor in play, so we shouldn't necessarily expect a very clear trend. For example, consider alog 79825 . This alog showed that at least some of the contamination lines are violin mode + calibration line intermodulations. Some of them (the weaker ones) disappeared below the rest of the noise when the violin mode amplitude decreased. Others (the stronger ones) remained visible at reduced amplitude. Both clusters vanished when the temporary calibration lines were off. If we asked the question "How high do the violin modes need to be...?" using just these two clusters, we'd get different apparent answers depending on (a) which cluster we chose to track (weak or strong), and (b) which time period we selected (calibration lines on or off). This is because at least some of the contamination is dependent on the presence & strength of a second line, not a violin mode.

Looking at the data

First, let's take a look at a simple scatter plot of the violin mode height vs the number of lines identified. This is figure 1. It's essentially an updated version of the scatter plots in alog 71501. It looks like there's a change around 1e-39 on the horizontal axis (which corresponds to peak violin mode height).

However, when we add color-coding by date (figure 2), new features can be seen. There's a shift at the left side of the plot, and an unusual group of high-line-count points in early O4.

The shift at the left side of the plot is likely due to an unrelated data quality issue: combs in the band of interest. In particular, the 9.5 Hz comb, which was identified and removed mid O4, contributes to the line count. Once we subtract out the number of lines which were identified as being part of a comb, this shift disappears (figure 3).

With the distracting factor of comb counts removed, we still need to understand the high-line-count time period. This is more interesting. I've broken the data down into three epochs: start of O4 - June 21, 2023 (figure 4); June 21, 2023 - Sept 1 2023 (figure 5); and Sept 1 2023 - present (figure 6). As shown in the plots, the middle epoch seems notably different from the others.

These dates are highly approximate. The violin mode ring-ups are intermittent, so it's not possible to pinpoint the changes sharply. The Sept 1 date is just the month boundary that seemed to best differentiate between the unusual time period and the rest of O4. The June 21 date is somewhat less arbitrary; it's the date on which the input power was brought back to 60W (alog 70648), which seems a bit suspicious. Note that, with this data set, I can't actually differentiate between a change on June 21 and a change (say) on June 15th, so please don't be misled by the specificity of the selected boundary.

Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
kiet.pham@LIGO.ORG - 13:53, Friday 18 April 2025 (83997)DetChar

Kiet, Sheila

We recently started looking into the whether nonlinearity of the ADC can contribute to this by looking at the ADC range that we were using in O4a. 

They are showed in the H1:OMC-DCPD_A_WINDOW_{MAX,MIN} that sum the 4 DC photodiodes (DCPD). They are 18 bits DCPD, so that channel should saturate at 4* 2^17 ~520,000 counts. 

Now there are instances that agree with Ansel report when there are violin mode ring up that we can see a shift in the count baseline.

Jun 29 - Jun 30, 2023 when the baseline seems to shift up and stay there for >1 months, Detchar summary page show significant higher violin mode ring up in the usual 500-520Hz region as well as the nearby region (480-500 Hz) 

Oct 9, 2023 is when the temporary calibration lines are turned off 72096, the down shift happened right after the lines are off (after 16:40 UTC)

During this period, we were using a~5% of the ADC range (difference between max and min channel divided by the total range - 500,000 to 500,000 counts), and it went down to ~2.5 % once the shift happenned on Oct 9, 2023. We want to do something similar with Livingston, using the L1:IOP-LSC0_SAT_CHECK_DCPD_{A,B}_{MAX,MIN} channels to see the ADC range and the typical count values of those channels.

Another thing for us to maybe take a closer look is the baseline count value increase around May 03 2023. There was a change to the DCPC total photocurrent during that time (69358). Maybe worth checking if there is violin mode contaimination during the period before that. 


 

Images attached to this comment
kiet.pham@LIGO.ORG - 10:28, Tuesday 29 April 2025 (84136)DetChar

Kiet, Sheila

More updates related to the ADC range investigation: 

  • ADC ranges comparison between Hanford and Livingston: 
    • At Livingston we are using the L1:IOP-LSC0_SAT_CHECK_DCPD_{A,B}_{MAX,MIN} channels, which were not turned on until 1398035799; these channels saturate at 2^17 counts. 
    • At Hanford we are using the H1:OMC-DCPD_A_WINDOW_{MAX, MIN}, these channels saturate at 4 * 2^17 counts as they are sum over 4 DCPD
    • We looked through the data in Feb 2025 when the violin modes at Livingston were somewhat higher than usual. 
    • The range being used in compatible with Hanford (2-4%), and the count values are also similar as LHO counts/4 and LLO counts are in +- 5000 counts of each others.
  • Comparing the comtaimination before the DARM offset change in ER15:
    • We saw hint of contaimination even before the change (Using Fscan spectrum of May 2nd) 

Further points + investigations:

  • Ansel pointed out that it was odd to have a significant shift in the baseline count value + range when the temporary calibration lines turned off as these calibration lines were not that different in height than other calibration lines (see plot in the Alog 83997)
  • Joseph from LLO gave us a spectrum comparison between H1, L1 raw ADC count, there is a notable difference in the higher order violin modes
    • To do: looking to periods of when the both (1st and 2nd) violin modes ring up and periods of only the first violin mode ring up to see the contaimination caused by the 2nd mode or higher down mixing
  • Evan pointed out that during the period of high contaimination (June 30th - Aug 9th; 2023), the range stayed between 7 - 20%; and LHO in general seemed to have higher rate of saturation + intermitten increase of the ADC range than LLO. 
    • To do: Selecting the periods of stable ADC range in LHO data, and run the average spectrum over those periods to see the level of contaimination, assessing the contribution of the periods with increase ADC range. 

       
Images attached to this comment
kiet.pham@LIGO.ORG - 15:07, Wednesday 07 May 2025 (84305)DetChar

Kiet, Sheila

Following up on the investigation into potential intermixing between higher-order violin modes down to the ~500 Hz region:

The Fscan team compiled a detailed summary of the daily maximum peak height (log10 of peak height above noise in the first violin mode region) for the violin modes near 500 Hz (v1) and 1000 Hz (v2). They also tracked line counts in the corresponding frequency bands: 400–600 Hz for v1 and 900–1000 Hz for v2. This data is available in the Google spreadsheet (LIGO credentials required).

  • We identified dates when both violin modes were elevated (n1_height > 7; n2_height > 8) and when only the fundamental mode was elevated (n1_height > 7; n2_height < 8). For each case, we computed average PSDs using an FFT length of 1800 s. The study period spans from August 10, 2023, to January 14, 2025, starting when ADC counts stabilized after the temporary calibration lines at 24.4 and 24.5 Hz were turned off (see alog  72096)
    • The psds comparisons is shown in vmodes_psds_comparison.png.
      • Note that the number of averages differs between the cases; there are significantly fewer days with only v1 elevated, which explains why the [v1 high, v2 low] spectrum appears noisier in some regions. However, similar features are still present in the [v1 high, v2 high] case.
      • Notably, there appears to be more spectral content in the 450–550 Hz range when both modes are elevated, with certain lines showing significant power (highlighted in green).

 

  • Daily Fscan data around the violin modes is summarized in Pairwise_scatter_plots.png , where n1_height and n2_height are the max peak heights of v1 and v2, and n1_count and n2_count are the corresponding line counts. There appears to be a threshold in violin mode amplitude beyond which line counts increase (based on {n1_height, n2_height} vs. {n1_count, n2_count} trends).
  • We also ploted how n1_count varies with n2_height when n1_height is high in n1_count_vs_n2_height_when_v1_high.png

Next: We plan to further investigate the lines that appear when both modes are high, the goal is to identify possible intermodulation products using the recorded peak frequencies of the violin modes.

Images attached to this comment
Displaying reports 1401-1420 of 83163.Go to page Start 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 End