aLIGO LHO Logbook

H1 SQZ - Comment to Ops OWL Intervention

oli.patane@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 23:33:21 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85451

After this, I quickly popped out of Observing to run SQZ ANG Adjust to try and get the range higher.

H1 SQZ - Ops OWL Intervention

oli.patane@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 23:25:34 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85450

I got called for the same issue that Tony and Sheila had earlier today where the SHG PZT hit its voltage limit. I followed the very clear instructions given in that alog and just adjusted the PZT slider, and we were able to lock the SHG. I accepted the sdf for the SHG PZT offset.

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Ops EVE Shift End

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 22:11:24 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 85449

TITLE: 07/01 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
INCOMING OPERATOR: Oli
SHIFT SUMMARY:
SQZr trouble at the start of the lock but recovered and got to Observing at 00:07 UTC.

H1 was locked fine for 4 hours and 35 Minutes.
Then all the sudden Unknown Lockloss at 2025-07-01 03:56:04 UTC.

I tried to allow H1 to relock itself but it wanted me to find ASL-Y arm by hand and then seemed to get trapped in a PRMI loop. So after about 30 Minutes I did an Initial Alignment.
This did allow for a quick lock of DRMI_1F.
H1 is currently at ENGAGE_SOFT_LOOPS and locking Quickly.

LOG:

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
00:25	PCAL	F Llamas	PCAL Lab	yes	Settign up measurements	01:13

H1 General - Lockloss from NLN

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:50:33 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 85448

Unknown lockloss @ 3:56:07 UTC
No noticeable Seismic activity.
No PI ring Ups.
No saturations aside from HAM6 from the Fast Shutter.

Lockloss

Images attached to this report

H1 General - PCAL Lab TX module Maintenance complete

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 19:39:39 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 85447

On Friday Jun 27th Francisco and I went to the the PCAL lab and did a PCAL TX module maintenance according to T1600436.
AOM alignment was touched up

Results:

Laser SN05
Date	June-26-2025
Laser Shutter Check	Fail
Max OFS Offset	7.2V
95% OFS Offset	6.84V
Operating OFS Offset	3.42V
Laser Output Power	1.97W
Rejected Laser Power	3.3mW
AOM Input Power	1.92W
Max Diffracted Power	1.23W
Un-Diffracted Power	0.500W
AOM Diffraction Efficiency	64%
AOM Rejected Power	3.3mW
TxPD Power	1.4mW
OFSPD Power	1.73mW
Outer Beam Power	294mW
Inner Beam Power	292mW
Output Beam Power Ratio	0.9932
OFS Gain	7.50V
OFS Phase Margin	43.7
ALOG

Non-image files attached to this report

Sosb-office25063017510.pdf

H1 SUS - Created new OSEM estimator fits for SR3 Yaw

edgard.bonilla@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 17:42:25 -0700

Author: edgard.bonilla@ligo.org

Report ID: 85446

Ivey and Edgard,

We just finshed a fit of the Yaw-to-Yaw transfer functions for the OSEM estimator using the measurements that Oli took for SR3 last Tuesday [see LHO: 85288].

The fits were added to the Sus SVN and live inside '~/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/Common/FilterDesign/Estimator/fits_H1SR3_2025-06-30.mat' . They are already calibrated to work on the filter banks for the estimator and can be installed using 'make_SR3_yaw_model.m', which lives in the same folder [for reference, see LHO: 84041, where Oli got the fits running for a test].

Attached below are two pictures of the fits we made for the estimator.

The first attachment shows the Suspoint Y to M1 DAMP Y fit. We made sure to fit the asymptotic behavior as well as we could, which ends up being 0.95x10^{-3} um/nm (5% lower than expected from the OSEM calibration). The zpk for this fit is

'zpk([-0.024+20.407i,-0.024-20.407i,-0.044+11.493i,-0.044-11.493i,0,0],[-0.067+21.278i,-0.067-21.278i,-0.095+14.443i,-0.095-14.443i,-0.07+6.405i,-0.07-6.405i],-0.001)'

The second attachment shows the M1 drive Y to M1 DAMP Y fit. We kept the same poles that we had for the other fit, but manually fit the zeros and gain to make a good match. The zpk for this fit is

'zpk([-0.051+8.326i,-0.051-8.326i,-0.011+19.259i,-0.011-19.259i],[-0.067+21.278i,-0.067-21.278i,-0.095+14.443i,-0.095-14.443i,-0.07+6.405i,-0.07-6.405i],12.096)'

Hopefully Oli and co. will have time to test this soon!

SEI, SUS

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to Monday Ops Eve Shift report.

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 17:19:55 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 85445

Sheila Fixed the issue, I have attached soem pictures to help future Ops that find this issue:
Sitemap -> SQZ -> SQZ_OVERVIEW -> SQZT0 -> PZT -> Move H1:SQZ-SHG_PZT_OFFSET slider.

We Now have a "pump fiber rej power in ham7, nominal 35e-3, align fiber pol on sqzt0" error message on SQZ-OPO_LR. nopted will do tomorrow.

Then we took SQZ_ANG_ADJUST Guardian to ADJUST_SQZ_ANG_ADF [10] which kinda worked but didn't improve sqzing and reverted back.

I then accepted the SDFs and now we're back in Observing at 00:07:25 UTC.

An NDScope of what the GRD-SQZ_SHG Guardian was doing.

OpsInfo, SQZ

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Monday Ops Eve Shift report.

anthony.sanchez@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 16:42:07 -0700

Author: anthony.sanchez@ligo.org

Report ID: 85444

TITLE: 06/30 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 10mph Gusts, 4mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.08 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

H1 Is Currently Locked at NLN {600} But not Observing due to a SQZ_SHG issue:
Error SQZ_SHG [LOCKED.run] USERMSG 0: PZT voltage limits exceeded.
Sheila is currently working on the issue.

H1 General - OPS Monday day shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 16:36:11 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85437

TITLE: 06/30 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
INCOMING OPERATOR: Tony
SHIFT SUMMARY: We've had to relock twice, the second time we struggled a bit with DRMI. We're currently locked at NLN but trying to fix a SQZ SHG PZT issue.
LOG:

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
14:50	FAC	Randy	EndX	N	Chiller yard pump checks	16:01
15:13	FAC	Kim	MidY	MidY	Tech clean	16:20
15:14	FAC	Nellie	MidX	N	Tech clean	16:20
16:24	EE	Ken	Mezz	N	Electrical work	18:56
16:49	FAC	Chris	VAC Prep	N	Sanding	17:39
19:34	FAC	Randy	MidY	N	Inventory	20:30
20:06	FAC	Tyler	Mids	N	FAMIS checks	20:36
22:39	CAL	Tony	PCAL lab	LOCAL	Prep for tomorrows measurement	22:58

15:00 UTC dropped Observing to start commissioning
15:40 UTC lockloss
- 16:50 NLN
18:23 UTC lockloss
- 19:26 UTC NLN
- UTC Observing after some SQZ work
- 19:55 UTC Hanford monthly safety notification test
- 20:45 UTC we dropped Observing to fix the SQZ ANG servo
20:46 UTC lock loss
- I was prompted to find YARM by hand
- 21:28 UTC I did an alignment after 2x of DRMI being able to lock but too misaligned for ASC
- We still couldn't get DRMI, on the 2nd round of PRMI I tried to manually help PRMI after it locked
  - DRMI still took another 12 minutes after this, with some more small adjustments by me (~45 minutes in total)
- 23:21 UTC NLN but the SHG can't lock due to a PZT voltage issue (too low)

H1 CDS - Restarted the daqd and nds processes on h1daqnds0

jonathan.hanks@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 15:02:02 -0700

Author: jonathan.hanks@ligo.org

Report ID: 85443

The h1daqnds0 system stopped accepting connections on its main nds1 port (8088). We restarted the rts-nds and rts-daqd services around 2:59pm localtime.

There were no log messages or dmesg output.

H1 General - 20:46 UTC lockloss

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 13:48:27 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85442

20:46 UTC lockloss

Lockloss

H1 ISC - DARM Offset Steps while changing CO2s

jennifer.wright@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 13:07:31 -0700

Author: jennifer.wright@ligo.org

Report ID: 85434

Jennie W, Sheila, Ryan C, Ibrahim, Corey

Over the last 3 weeks three DARM offstep measurements (where we change the DARM offset to look at the fraction of the light from the differential mode which makes it past the OMC) have been taken.

This is so we can get data points to compare to my model of ARM to OMC mode-matching. These were done at three different CO2 X power levels.

Measurement 1: 2025/06/18 20:44:55 UTC

CO2 central heating on ITMX: 1.698W

CO2 central heating on ITMY: 1.694 W

The test is run with /ligo/gitcommon/labutils/darm_offset_step/auto_darm_offset.py . The data is processed with plot_darm_optical_gain_vs_dcpd_sum.py .

Graphs of the power after the OMC vs. optical gain are in the first plot, optical gain vs. offset and anti-symmetric port power vs. power out of the omc are in this document.

The average contrast defect is 1.07 mW, the junk light is 679 mW, the transmission of the differential mode light at the AS port by the OMC is 1/1.217 = 82.2%.

Measurement 2: 2025/06/20 15:11:46 UTC

CO2 central heating on ITMX: 1.698 W

CO2 central heating on ITMY: 1.711 W

The test is run with /ligo/gitcommon/labutils/darm_offset_step/auto_darm_offset.py . The data is processed with plot_darm_optical_gain_vs_dcpd_sum.py .

Graphs of the power after the OMC vs. optical gain are in the first plot, optical gain vs. offset and anti-symmetric port power vs. power out of the omc are in this document.

The avergae contrast defect is 1.03 mW, the junk light is 677 mW, the transmission of the differential mode light at the AS port by the OMC is 1/1.212= 82.5%.

Measurement 3: 2025/06/30 15:06:50 UTC

CO2 central heating on ITMX: 1.698 W

CO2 central heating on ITMY: 1.721 W

The test is run with /ligo/gitcommon/labutils/darm_offset_step/auto_darm_offset.py . The data is processed with plot_darm_optical_gain_vs_dcpd_sum.py .

Graphs of the power after the OMC vs. optical gain are in the first plot, optical gain vs. offset and anti-symmetric port power vs. power out of the omc are in this document.

The avergae contrast defect is 1.09 mW, the junk light is 694 mW, the transmission of the differential mode light at the AS port by the OMC is 1/1.212= 82.5%.

This is not a very good test for our purposes as I think we want a larger change in mode-matching from thermal tuning to inform our simulations of Arm->OMC mode-mis-match.

Each time we have stepped the CO2Y down (all these darm offset measurements were meant to be repeated after decreasing the CO2 power) for this test (measurement 2 on the 20th June, alog 85238 shows attempt from 23rd June, alog 85335 shows attempt from the 25th June, alog 85429 is measurement 3) we have lost lock, so we might not be able to repeat this measurement with a larger CO2 step.

SQZ

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

all_plots_plot_darm_optical_gain_vs_dcpd_sum_1434314717_June_18th__1_698W_CO2X__1_694_W.pdf

all_plots_plot_darm_optical_gain_vs_dcpd_sum_1434467528_June_20th__1_698W_CO2X__1_711_W_CO2Y.pdf

all_plots_plot_darm_optical_gain_vs_dcpd_sum_1435331232_June_30th__1_698W_CO2X__1_721_W_CO2Y.pdf

H1 SQZ - slow range degradations due to squeezing, trying to turn on SQZ angle servo

sheila.dwyer@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 13:03:54 -0700

Author: sheila.dwyer@ligo.org

Report ID: 85427

Over the weekend the ifo range has been slowly degrading due to loss of squeezing, as noted in both Ryan and Ibrahim's shift alogs.

The attached trend shows the range drfiting with the sqz blrms 3 (centered at 350 Hz). We could implement servos for the squeezing angle demod phase using the ADF (error signal for this servo shown in purple), or for the OPO temperature, or both.

I stepped the sqz angle demod phase to look at the ADF error signal, using z step -s 30 H1:SQZ-CLF_REFL_RF6_PHASE_DELAYSTEP +111,24 (second attachment) I then adjusted H1:SQZ-ADF_VCXO_PLL_PHASE to get a zero crossing near where the squeezer blrms were low and repeated a smaller demod angle scan, which had the error signal crossing 0 at good squeezing. I edited the guardian to ask it to turn this servo back on, (and changed the setpoint and nominal state). The servo was osciallting a bit so I reduced the gain from -0.5 to -0.2. Then servo went in the wrong directon, and we lost lock.

After relocking the servo worked well, in the early part of the lock when the SQZ ASC is off.

LLO has done some work on automating the temperature adjustment:

Script running out of observing: 77278
OPO temperature dither set up: 75430
Masayuki original OPO temp set up: 60886

Images attached to this report

H1 PSL - PSL 10-Day Trends

ryan.short@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 12:56:21 -0700

Author: ryan.short@ligo.org

Report ID: 85441

FAMIS 31092

Nothing much to report other than the FSS TPD signal has been dropping over the past week, so Jason plans to do a RefCav alignment tomorrow. PMC REFL has also come down very slightly.

Images attached to this report

H1 TCS - TCS Chiller Water Level Top-Off FAMIS

oli.patane@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 12:55:04 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85440

Closes FAMIS#27818, last checked 85024 (I am a week late)

TCSX: 30.5, no water added

TCSY: 10.6, no water added

No leak in water cup

H1 General - Comment to 18:23 UTC lockloss (1h33m lock)

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 12:52:21 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85439

19:26 UTC back to NLN

H1 General - Comment to 15:40 UTC lockloss (19h59m lock)

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 12:52:04 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85438

16:50 UTC back to NLN

H1 GRD - PRCL2 GAIN adjustment added to THERMALIZATION guardian

oli.patane@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 12:36:22 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85435

Elenna, Sheila, Oli

I've added thermalization ramping for the PRCL2 gain so that it ramps from 1.0 to 1.9 over the first 75 minutes at max power. The 'unthermalized' (1.0) and 'thermalized' (1.9) values are taken from lscparams in the new dictionary 'prcl2_gain', so any changes to be made in the future to those values should be set in that dictionary, and then the THERMALIZATION guardian reloaded so that it grabs those new values.

This addition is pretty much a copy of the way we ramp the SRCL offset, but for PRCL gain of course..

This change to the THERMALIZATION guardian as well as the dictionary addition to lscparams have been committed to svn as r32157.

ISC

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - Comment to Two ~13 Hz ring up locklosses identified

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 12:36:08 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85436

Another one: alog85428

H1 ISC - PRCL loop adjustments

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 12:35:19 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 85431

We continue to have 13 Hz ringups in the LSC that cause locklosses, so I took at look at what's going on with PRCL (it's the usual culprit). I measured the OLG every few minutes after we reached NLN. I found that PRCL loses a factor of 2 gain over the first 40 minutes of NLN. The current design is set to have PRCL with a UGF of 30 Hz once the gain settles after thermalization. However, this leads to >10 dB gain peaking at the start of the lock. There's overall not a lot of phase in the loop design, and if the gain gets too low this is causing the locklosses.

I looked at the loop design, and reminded myself of Gabriele's intentions with the PRCL redesign, here. His design applied the Dcntrl filter, which means to go back to the old design we only have to disengage this filter. You can see from the design comparison in his alog that the original design has a much broader phase. We might inject more noise by going back to the old design, but I'm not sure that will be an issue, especially if we continue to run the PRCL feedforward.

Turning off the Dcntrl filter gives more phase at high frequency, meaning we can increase the PRCL UGF. I increased the PRCL2 gain to 1.9 and got a UGF of 50 Hz, with about 35 deg phase. If we don't change this gain at all, PRCL will start in the lock with a UGF of 100 Hz and a phase margin of 18 degrees if the digital gain is always set to 1.9. This will then thermalize down to 50 Hz.

I also disengaged the 3.4 Hz resgain filter, because we no longer need to suppress motion at that frequency, and hopefully we'll get back a little more phase at low frequency as well.

Oli is reworking the thermalization guardian to ramp the PRCL2 gain from 1 to 1.9 over the first hour, starting after we reach max power.

I commented out the lines in lownoise_length_control that change the PRCL shape and loop gain.

I checked the PRCL noise injection with the feedforward template, and there slightly more noise injection from 20-30 Hz, but I'm not sure that's a problem.

I updated the SDF for the filter changes, and to unmonitor H1:LSC-PRCL2_GAIN since the guardian will now update that gain.

Plot 1 shows the evolution of PRCL olg with the 30 Hz UGF design, Plot 2 shows the evolution of the loop suppression

Plot 3 and Plot 4 show the OLG and loop suppression respectively with the 50 Hz UGF design

Plot 5 compares a PRCL coupling measurement from last week with today.

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - Caused lockloss from jitter injection

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 11:25:32 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 85433

1435343011

It will probably register as an IMC lockloss, just wanted to make sure people know it was caused by an injection.

IOO

H1 General - 18:23 UTC lockloss (1h33m lock)

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 11:23:55 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85432

18:23 UTC lockloss alog85433

Lockloss

LHO VE - Mon CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 10:53:52 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85430

Mon Jun 30 10:12:57 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 12min 53secs

Images attached to this report

H1 General - 13Hz Ring-up after CO2 step

matthewrichard.todd@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 10:16:47 -0700

Author: matthewrichard.todd@ligo.org

Report ID: 85429

M. Todd, R. Crouch, E. Capote, S. Dwyer

After 5 minutes or so from stepping the CO2 lasers from 1.7W to 0.9W, we began to see the 13Hz ring-up again before losing lock.

We believe this to be PRCL losing gain because of the change in the CO2s. I'm also wondering if the CO2s may be miscentered and causing some roll modes via differential heating of the fibers -- the frequenices do not exactly match up I think but need to check on this.

Lockloss

Images attached to this report

H1 General - 15:40 UTC lockloss (19h59m lock)

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 08:46:08 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85428

15:40 UTC lockloss while we were running the CO2 stepper. alog85429

Lockloss

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - DARM OFFSET step script

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 08:30:21 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85426

I ran the DARM offset stepping script using Jennie Wright's instructions from 85136.

Writing data to
/ligo/gitcommon/labutils/darm_offset_step/data/darm_offset_steps_2025_Jun_30_15_06_50_UTC.txt

H1 General - OPS Monday day shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 07:38:07 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85425

TITLE: 06/30 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 145Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan S
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 8mph Gusts, 4mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.07 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

We've been locked for just udner 19 hours
- SQZing doesn't look the best, particularly at high frequency
Low wind, secondary microseism is starting to creep up a little
PI24 rang up 6 times overnight, but was damped
Commissioning is planned from 15:00 - 19:00 UTC today

Images attached to this report

H1 CDS - Update on camera num-open-files issue following Pylon upgrade last Tuesday

david.barker@ligo.org — Mon, 30 Jun 2025 06:53:34 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85424

FRS34130

Upgrading Pylon on h1digivideo[4,5,6] has fixed the problem whereby camera processes continued to open files until they eventually reached the OS num_files limit and the camera crashed (new files were opened each time connection to the camera was restored, old files were not cleaned up).

Since the upgrade Tuesday 24 June 2025 the number of files open per process has remained static. Details in FRS, this ticket has been closed.

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Summary

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 21:59:55 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85423

TITLE: 06/30 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 146Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING since 19:42 UTC (9 hr lock!)

An extremely calm shift in which the circumstancial lock-killing culprits of the world evidently and collectively decided to take a nap. In other words, there have been no earthquakes, the secondary microseism is as low as can be, wind is under 10mph, no SQZ locklosses, no ETM LLs.

The only thing worth commenting on is that the SQZ angle is probably not ideal but according to past instructions from Sheila, we shouldn't go to comissioning if there are other IFOs observing. Since this was the case the entire shift, I did not drop out to try and optimize SQZ so this will have to wait till tomorrow/another lock.

LOG:

None

H1 DetChar - H1 DQ Shift Summary: 06/23/2025 - 06/29/2025

bhaskar.verma@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 21:18:11 -0700

Author: bhaskar.verma@ligo.org

Report ID: 85422

Link to DQ Shift Summary

The duty cycle for this week was 54.9%
h(t) spectrograms were showing continuous high amplitude noise around 140Hz for all the days.
Seismic, wind and ground motion remained relatively low with some occasional exceptions being here and there, which cause noise in the PEMs.
Glitchgram showed large amount of high SNR glitches for some days with increase in glitch rate.
Corner BSC2 [Y[ chamber experience very high amplitude noise at below 10 hz continuously for all days.
FScan plots were available except for Sunday, June 29 with the line count remaining at around 2400 well below the threshold.

DetChar

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Start

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 16:03:05 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85421

TITLE: 06/29 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 146Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 12mph Gusts, 5mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.05 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING since 19:42 UTC (3.5 hr lock)

Ryan C reports a very calm shift with the only comment that he had to run 2x initial alignments. I had to do this also a few days ago despite good DRMI flashes.

H1 General - OPS Sunday DAY shift summary

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 16:00:16 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85417

TITLE: 06/29 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 146Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY: One lockloss, I had to run 2 alignments to get DRMI to lock.
LOG: No log.

16:25 UTC PI24 rang up but was successfully damped back down.
16:38 UTC lockloss
- 17:16 UTC I ran an alignment after not being able to get PRMI
- Still couldn't lock DRMI or PRMI despite having good flashes around 100
- 18:32 UTC trying another alignment
- DRMI locked quickly now, I also adjusted the OPO temp while relocking
- 19:42 UTC Observing

H1 General - Comment to 16:38 UTC lockloss (15h56m lock)

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 12:49:18 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85420

19:42 UTC Observing

LHO VE - Sun CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 10:25:55 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85419

Sun Jun 29 10:13:36 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 13min 32secs

Images attached to this report

H1 General - 16:38 UTC lockloss (15h56m lock)

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 09:39:11 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85418

16:38 UTC lockloss

H1 General - Comment to OPS Sunday DAY shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 08:47:46 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85416

Low range coherence check at 14:30 UTC

Another at a time of lower range at 13:09 UTC

Images attached to this report

H1 General - OPS Sunday DAY shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 07:33:13 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85415

TITLE: 06/29 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 146Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan S
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 2mph Gusts, 0mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.06 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

We've been locked for just under 14hours!
- 2 superevents overnight
Low wind, low microseism
The range has dipped a little bit over the past ~3 hours, seems SQZ related

Images attached to this report

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Summary

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 21:59:05 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85414

TITLE: 06/29 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 149Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 00:40 UTC (4 hr lock)

A very calm shift in which we were able to lock fully automatically following an ETM Glitch Lockloss at the beginning of the shift (alog 85413). Otherwise, our range has remained mostly steady.

We also surtvived a 4.6 EQ from Northern California (and 2 of its similar aftershocks),.

LOG:

None

H1 General - OPS Saturday DAY shift summary

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 16:32:08 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85406

TITLE: 06/28 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 151Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY: Two locklosses, mostly automated relock on the first one. We are relocking at DRMI currently.
LOG: No log.

13:25 UTC lockloss
- 15:53 UTC Observing
- 18:23 UTC Superevent S250628am
- 19:00 - 19:31 UTC dropped observing to run a calibration measurement
20:43 UTC lockloss
- 22:05 UTC observing
23:18 UTC lockloss

H1 General - 23:18 UTC lockloss

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 16:19:45 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85413

23:18 UTC lockloss

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Start

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 16:06:32 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85412

TITLE: 06/28 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 153Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 20mph Gusts, 8mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.06 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 22:05 UTC

IFO recovered from an ETM glitch lockloss an hour ago.

H1 General - Comment to 20:43 UTC lockloss

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 15:09:20 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85411

22:05 UTC observing

H1 General - 20:43 UTC lockloss

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 13:44:52 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85410

20:43 UTC lockloss

There was a small ETMX glitch 1/4 of a second before the lockloss

Lockloss

H1 CAL - Saturday calibration measurement

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 12:37:23 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85409

We had been locked for just over 3 hours with a circulating power of ~381 kWs.

BroadBand

Start: 2025-06-28 19:01:05 UTC

Stop: 2025-06-28 19:06:16 UTC

Data: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250628T190105Z.xml

Simulines

Start: UTC: 2025-06-28 19:06:42.332738 UTC // GPStime: 1435172820.332738

Stop: UTC: 2025-06-28 19:30:00.055193 UTC // GPStime: 1435174218.055193

Data:

2025-06-28 19:29:59,859 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250628T190643Z.hdf5
2025-06-28 19:29:59,882 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20250628T190643Z.hdf5
2025-06-28 19:29:59,889 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250628T190643Z.hdf5
2025-06-28 19:29:59,897 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250628T190643Z.hdf5
2025-06-28 19:29:59,904 | INFO | File written out to: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250628T190643Z.hdf5

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

H1_calibration_report_20250628T190643Z.pdf

LHO VE - Sat CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 10:18:31 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85407

Sat Jun 28 10:12:51 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 12min 47secs

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to OPS Saturday day shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:53:59 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85405

15:53 UTC Observing

H1 General - OPS Saturday day shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 07:30:13 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85404

TITLE: 06/28 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Aligning
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan S
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 5mph Gusts, 3mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.06 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

We're in the middle of an alignment
There's been several medium/large earthquakes overnight
Low wind, and secondary microseism

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Summary

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 21:59:53 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85403

TITLE: 06/28 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY:

IFO is in ACQUIRE_DRMI_1F and LOCKING

Overall a very calm shift in which we were locked for the majority of it until the ETM glitch (lockloss alog 85402) killed the 8 hour lock.

Relocking was time consuming since the alignment was terrible and we have the 30 min wait before we can do an initial alignment. After I ran a fully auto inital alignment, locking went quickly until we lost lock at LOWNOISE_ASC (522). This also happened yesterday. Just like yesterday, the wind was hovering around 25mph with the primary microseism on the rise. Just like yesterday, there was an earthquake coming through. While I think we could have rode the EQ out and that the wind conditions weren't too bad, I believe that either this state might be a tad more susceptible to such noise or there's a controls issue. (or the same thing happened twice in the same way and will only happen twice). I will investigate tomorrow during shift.

Either way, we lost lock from DRMI but flashes looked good and I think (knock on SSTL) guardian will be able to get into OBSERVING on its own.

On the bright side, we rode through a 6.1 EQ from the phillippines though I did intervene to turn EQ mode on manually since the bulk of the ground motion was starting but the automation hadn't turned it on yet (judging from how much the ISC had to move to keep IFO still).

LOG:

None

H1 General - Lockloss 02:45 UTC

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 21:39:58 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85402

Lockloss due to ETM Glitch. H1 Lockloss Tool.

As I was writing this, we lost lock at LOWNOISE_ASC, same as yesterday. There also happened to be a 5.5 EQ passing through (same as yesterday with a more local 3.0 one)

Lockloss

H1 ISC - ISS work Thursday and Friday this week

jennifer.wright@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 18:20:02 -0700

Author: jennifer.wright@ligo.org

Report ID: 85401

Jennie W, Rahul, Keita

This is just a summary of our work over the last two days trying to repeat the alignment coupling measurements for the replacement ISS array unit (D1101059, unit S1202965). The reason we need to repeat these is because we have now uograded the washer and clamp plate in QPD assembly. See Keita's previous alog for details.

Thursday

First we changed input alignment to get roughly 4 V on each PD in the array, this is acheived by inserting the larger iris and using the two steering mirrors (M2 closest to the array, M1 further towards the laser) to change the input alignment of the auxiliary laser into the unit.

As we have tilted the QPD by adding the new components we need to re-align the QPD to centre the beam (which is split off from the main beam entering the unit by the beam splitter on the elevator assembly which sits at one corner of the ISS array unit).

Then we unscrewed the four screws holding the QPD down (see image) and tried to move the QPD to minimise the coupling from yaw motion if the input beam to pitch. We only managed to minimise pitch coupling and couldn't get it centred on qpd in yaw as the whole QPD unit moves a lot when not screwed down.

We screwed down the QPD but it was still off in yaw by a lot (see image).

As we were adjusting the input alignment mirror to check the coupling I managed to lost the input alignment to the array.

Friday

Today Keita brought the input alignment back by using the beam viewer to check the position on the diodes while changing M2. Then we saw about 3.5-4V on each of the PDs in the array. Next we only undid the two lower screws on the QPD (these hold the QPD unit itself clamped to the platform it sits on, the two upper screws hold in the connector to the back of the QPD and these were only slighly loosened). Keita moved around the unit till the QPD readout showed we were near centred and then we screwed down the unit. It moves alignment while being screwed down probably because of the angle of the QPD relative to the clamp.

For this alignment we used the QPD amplifier unit that gives a live visual readout of the centering.

We also have the option of using another amplifier that gives the QPD X, Y and SUM channels so we can read them on an oscilloscope but these had some weird saw tooth noise on them (see image from Thursday). Keita then discovered that we were using the wrong cable (too low a current rating) for this amplifier, we searched for the correct one but could not find it. We will get back to this on Monday.

Summary: We think we now have the QPD in a good place relative to the PD array as yaw and pitch are fairly decoupled, but maybe the angle of the QPD in rotation is still slightly off as the P and Y motion of the beam are still slightly off from the QPD quadrants. We need a new cable for the ON-TRAK amplifier.

ISC, PSL

Images attached to this report

H1 GRD - Guardian Change to choose turn on SQZ_ASC after thermalizing

matthewrichard.todd@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 17:07:57 -0700

Author: matthewrichard.todd@ligo.org

Report ID: 85400

M. Todd, S. Dwyer

This morning we made a change to the thermalization guardian (managed by ISC) with flags that allow the SQZ guardian to turn on the SQZ_ASC in the unthermalized state or this guardian can turn on SQZ_ASC after 75 minutes (thermalized-ish). We also turned the monitoring off so that this switch does not knock out observing.

For more info see:

/opt/rtcds/userapps/release/isc/h1/guardian/THERMALIZATION.py

SQZ

H1 General - OPS Friday day shift summary

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 16:30:04 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85389

TITLE: 06/27 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY: We've been locked for just under 5 hours, calm day.
LOG:

Start Time	System	Name	Location	Lazer_Haz	Task	Time End
16:21	FAC	Randy	EndY	N	Move crates around	18:02
17:38	CAL	Tony, Francisco	PCAL lab	LOCAL	Tx module maintenance	19:20
20:15	FIT	Tooba	Arm	N	Going for a walk	21:03
21:12	CAL	Francisco	PCAL lab	LOCAL	AOM alignment	23:45
22:29	PSL	Keita, Jennie	Optics lab	LOCAL	ISS array work	Ongoing

The LOCKLOSS_SHUTTER_CHECK failed at 09:05 UTC, I've added a check in H1_MANAGER to specifically look for the SHUTTER_FAIL state.
17:02 UTC lockloss
- 18:25 UTC I adjusted the OPO temperature while relocking
- The FC struggled to lock IR and we ended up changing the threshold
- 19:33 UTC Observing
  - 19:43 UTC We dropped observing for <1min as the SQZ ASC turned on and threw out an SDF diff which I unmonitored

OpsInfo

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Start

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 16:05:01 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85399

TITLE: 06/27 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 147Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan C
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 14mph Gusts, 9mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.03 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.05 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN (since 18:36 UTC) and OBSERVING since 19:33 UTC (4.5 hr lock)

An hour was spent comissioning to fix SQZ ASC, which now runs deeper into thermalization after NLN.

Otherwise, just planning to continue observing as long as possible!

LHO FMCS - Checking HVAC Fans - Weekly FAMIS 26399

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 15:58:56 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85398

Closes FAMIS 26399. Last checked in alog 85208.

All fans nominal, comparable to last week and within threshold.

Images attached to this report

H1 SEI - BRS Trends - FAMIS 26456

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 15:48:33 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85397

Closes FAMIS 26456. Last checked in alog 84705

Trends look normal. SEI BRS Maintenance work in Mid-May was part of vent work and is the only excursion from the threshold lines.

SEI

Images attached to this report

H1 SUS - Results from applying ECR E2400330 to UK SatAmp S1000278 -- more variation in existing channel components

jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 14:38:49 -0700

Author: jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org

Report ID: 85396

J. Kissel, F. Clara ECR E2400330 Fil modified another UK SatAmp (D0900900 / D0901284) per ECR E2400330, which means "rev'ing" up the D0901284 circuit board inside from -v4 to -v5. However, this one, S1000278, seems to have more variability in components that were not changed between channels -- namely if I - fit the measured zero and pole frequency, and - assume that a perfect, as drawn, value for the R181 = R182 resistors (as Fil confirms that these were +/-0.1% resistors) the total capacitance seems to have a ~2% variability. Not unreasonable, given that typical off-the-shelf caps of value 10 [uF] have +/-10% variability, so with two of these caps parallel, you could expect the total capacitance to be between 18 and 22 [uF], or +/-10%. As such, I propose we set a tolerance for these transfer functions to have the following values at the following "check" frequencies (i.e. logspace(log10(5),log10(50),3), which is a requestable frequency vector on an SR785 frequency response sweep, if fstart = 50, and fstop = 0.5, with N points = 3). These assume values assume 1% variation in transimpedance amp feedback resistor, and 2.5% variation in whitening cap. Freq Mag (Upper Bound) Mag (Lower Bound) Phase (Upper Bound) Phase (Lower Bound) [Hz] [V/V] or dB([V/V]) [V/V] or dB([V/V]) [deg] [deg] 0.5 5.4098 or 14.664 5.0554 or 14.075 -106.23 -106.5 5.0 38.415 or 31.69 36.671 or 31.286 -135.09 -133.72 50. 54.987 or 34.805 53.868 or 34.627 -174.2 -173.9 Freq Mag Tolerance db(Mag Tolerance) Phase Tolerance [Hz] [V/V] +/- [V/V] dB([V/V]) +/- dB([V/V]) [deg] +/- [deg] 0.5 5.2313 +/- 0.17847 14.372 +/- 0.29138 -106.36 +/- 0.12754 5.0 37.547 +/- 0.86844 31.491 +/- 0.19861 -134.41 +/- 0.67952 50. 54.428 +/- 0.55902 34.716 +/- 0.088757 -174.05 +/- 0.14395 That being said, we wouldn't replace the non-ECR components if the SatAmp didn't pass this test, we'll just use those under-performing SatAmps to be used on low priority stages, i.e. ones not used for damping loop control, i.e. not top mass stages. If many end up exceeding this thresholds, then we can start to prioritize which suspensions get the best.

Non-image files attached to this report

2025-06-26_UKSatAmpChar_S1000278_D09101284-v5_0p05to1000Hz_0p2VSEIN_DIFFOUT_SR785SN77461.pdf

2025-06-26_UKSatAmpChar_S1000278_D09101284-v5_0p05to1000Hz_0p2VSEIN_DIFFOUT_SR785SN77461_allresiduals.pdf

2025-06-26_UKSatAmpChar_S1000278_D09101284-v5_0p05to1000Hz_0p2VSEIN_DIFFOUT_SR785SN77461_allresiduals_tailoredfit.pdf

2025-06-26_D0901284-v5_proposedtolerancetest.pdf

H1 SQZ - Comment to SQZ SHG alignment and temperature adjusted, FC locking issues

sheila.dwyer@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 12:50:43 -0700

Author: sheila.dwyer@ligo.org

Report ID: 85395

Jennie W, Ryan C, Sheila

Ryan and Jennie saw that the filter cavity had trouble locking again. We looked at the filter cavity transmission and launched power now compared to 10 days ago. The launched power has dropped to 71% of what it was (after my slight improvement this morning), and the transmitted power is 69% of what it was. This means that the main reason the filter cavity tranmission has decreased is the lower injected power (due to SHG power drop), not a filter cavity alignment problem.

The guardian has a checker that the filter cavity is locked in green when transmission is above 60uW, which we lowered to 50uW in the GR_LOCKED checker. With the lower transmission the power was sometimes dropping below 50uW, so this would help. We will see what happens with the SHG power over the next few days.

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to Lockloss 17:02 UTC

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 12:34:47 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85394

19:33 UTC Observing after troubleshooting the SQZ FC, I accepted an SDF related to the SHG temp.

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to OPS Monday day shift start

keita.kawabe@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 12:28:24 -0700

Author: keita.kawabe@ligo.org

Report ID: 85393

This is OK, the AS port went dark and stayed there for about 70ms or so after the lockloss and there was no excessive power surge that would have caused the fast shutter to be triggered.

The maximum power of ~1.4W was observed ~160ms after the lockloss, which is well below the threshold for the analog FS trigger (3 to 4W, I don't remember the exact number).

If something similar happened with 60W, though, FS might have been triggered.

Attached is the estimate of the power coming into HAM6 using two different sensors (PEM-CS_ADC_5_19 = HAM6 power sensor in the AS camera can which monitors power before the fast shutter, and ASC-AS_A_DC_NSUM after). Neither of these have hardware whitening, neither saturated (ASA was close to saturation but the HAM6 power sensor saturation threshold is about 570W when beam diverter is open, 5.7k if closed).

Note that the calibration of the PEM channel is a factor of 10 smaller than that in the observation mode (0.177W/ct, see alog 81112 and git repo for lock loss tool) because the beam diverter (90:10) was open.

Images attached to this report

LHO VE - Fri CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 10:26:26 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85392

Fri Jun 27 10:12:24 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 12min 21secs

Images attached to this report

H1 SQZ - SQZ SHG alignment and temperature adjusted, FC locking issues

sheila.dwyer@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 10:06:19 -0700

Author: sheila.dwyer@ligo.org

Report ID: 85390

The filter cavity was having a hard time locking, and it looks like the FC green trans power has been dropping slowly over the last 3 weeks, which seems to be caused by a drop in the SHG power from around 100-110 mW down to 77 mW .

I adjusted the picos and the SHG temperature, and recovered the SHG power to 86 mW, so there is still a lot of missing power. The filter cavity locked after this.

I've added a template for this adjustment to userapps/sqz/h1/Templates/ndscope/SHG_alignment_temp_adjust.yaml

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Lockloss 17:02 UTC

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 10:04:16 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85391

Lockloss at 17:02 UTC in NLN while we were waiting for the FC to lock.

Lockloss

H1 General - Comment to OPS Monday day shift start

sheila.dwyer@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 09:03:54 -0700

Author: sheila.dwyer@ligo.org

Report ID: 85388

The shutter did not trigger in this last lockloss, it looks like the light heading to the AS port was not high enough to trigger the shutter.

The lockloss_shutter_check guardian check for a kick in the HAM6 GS 13s anytime that we loose lock with more than 25kW circulating power in the arms. In this case we had just reach 100kW circulating power, so the guardian expected the shutter to trigger. This lockloss looks unusual in that there isn't a increase in the power going to the AS port right before the lockloss.

Ryan ran the shutter test and the shutter is working correctly now.

I think that this is probably the result of an usual lockloss happening at somewhat lower circulating power than usual. We should probably edit the logic in IFO notify to call for operator assistance whenever the shutter is in the failed state.

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to OPS Monday day shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 08:43:08 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85387

At the time of the request for help 10:22 UTC, we were in in CHECK_AS_SHUTTER where it was presumably stuck at SHUTTER_FAIL which I've encountered again at 15:22 UTC. It's been in that state since 09:05 UTC when we lost lock from 25Ws and the SHUTTER GRD reported "No kick... peak GS13 signal = 51.226"

Images attached to this report

H1 CDS - Comment to CDS Maintenance Summary: Tuesday 24th June 2025

david.barker@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 08:24:25 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85386

Tue24Jun2025
LOC TIME HOSTNAME MODEL/REBOOT
11:52:26 h1asc0 h1asc <<< Elenna's new asc model

not shown, shutdown of both TW0 and TW1 for file manipulation at this point
12:17:51 h1daqdc0 [DAQ] <<< 0-leg restart
12:18:03 h1daqfw0 [DAQ]
12:18:03 h1daqtw0 [DAQ]
12:18:05 h1daqnds0 [DAQ]
12:18:12 h1daqgds0 [DAQ]
12:18:15 h1susauxb123 h1edc[DAQ] <<< edc restart with new vacuum channel list
12:24:09 h1daqdc1 [DAQ] << 1-leg restart
12:24:22 h1daqfw1 [DAQ]
12:24:22 h1daqtw1 [DAQ]
12:24:23 h1daqnds1 [DAQ]
12:24:31 h1daqgds1 [DAQ]
12:25:06 h1daqgds1 [DAQ] <<< gds1 second restart

H1 General - Comment to OPS Monday day shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 07:46:46 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85385

14:46 UTC DRMI is struggling when ASC starts, I'm going to run a manual_IA

H1 General - OPS Monday day shift start

ryan.crouch@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 07:32:53 -0700

Author: ryan.crouch@ligo.org

Report ID: 85383

TITLE: 06/27 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan S
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 9mph Gusts, 4mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.05 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

We were stuck in PREP_FOR_LOCKING with ISC_LOCK stalled with IFO_NOTIFY and H1_MANAGER asking for help (10:22 UTC)
As soon as I requested H1_MANAGER back to idle it released ISC_LOCK and we started to lock again
- At first glance I'm not sure why it was stuck
- The timer "to NLN with an initial alignment already having run" was why it was calling for help but it should have kept trying to lock itself?

H1 CDS - Comment to HWS camera control code running, EPICS monitoring via MEDM

david.barker@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 07:30:58 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85384

Here is the same view when H1 is locked and the cameras have been disabled.

Images attached to this report

LHO VE - Comment to Annulus Ion Pump for BSC1 Rails

gerardo.moreno@ligo.org — Fri, 27 Jun 2025 04:00:48 -0700

Author: gerardo.moreno@ligo.org

Report ID: 85382

Well, it appears as if the pump still has some life, just a few minutes ago started to pump the annulus system, for now.

Images attached to this report

LHO General - Comment to OPS Eve Shift Summary

camilla.compton@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 22:19:00 -0700

Author: camilla.compton@ligo.org

Report ID: 85381

We disabled SQZ ASC for the night (not FC ASC), to prevent it from running away again overnight until someone can check what happened.

SQZ

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Summary

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 22:07:57 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85380

TITLE: 06/27 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 150Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan S
SHIFT SUMMARY:

IFO is in NLN and OBSERVING as of 04:13 UTC

Quite the frustrating shift in which I encountered:

Issue ALSX Crystal Freq -- - has been happening for at least a week now. Fix: Toggle the ALSX PLL on/off but this barely works if at all. Eventually, it cleared on its own after about 45 minutes of low hope.
Issue: 2 Lockloss-causing 3.0 EQs in south Oregon. Fix: Increase luck.
Issue: SQZ_ASC issues and inability to lock SQZ LO. Fix: With Camilla, saw that SQZ ASC was driving ZM4/6 cts to the 900s so reset history and edited SQZ params to disable SQZ FC until tomorrow. After resetting the history, SQZFC worked just fine. This issue caused us to drop from OBSERVING from 04:13 to 04:53 UTC. (accepted SDF below)
Issue: DRMI Locking: Truly no clue if it is an amalgamation of bad aligment, winds from 20-30mph and high microseiem (primary) or just bad luck. The flashes for both PRMI and DRMI both times were more than sufficient to lock DRMI yet we waited in these states for more than a cumulative hour just waiting for lock. I had to run 2 initial alignments after I could not lock on the first auto one for over 2 hrs. I ran a second manual initial alignment and this seemed to work. Then, we lost lock due to an ADS_EXCURSION (according to Lockloss Tool) and the DRMI issues were back. After repeating MICH, PRMI and DRMI multiple times, finally PRMI caught and I was able to lock (and eat). Lock trouble details about this in alog 85377. Fix: Manual Initial Alignment (apparently)

LOG:

None

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to OPS Midshift Update: Locking Troubles

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 20:22:10 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85379

Lockloss from 522 (LOWNLOISE_ASC). Lost lock at LOWNOISE_ASC due to 2.9 South Oregon EQ. DRMI again is not locking despite touching suspensions, going through PRMI, MICH. Flashes are just fine..

Re-locking now and if this continues to fail for another 20 minutes, I will do yet another manual initial alignment, which is so far the only thing that seems to work.

H1 General - Comment to OPS Midshift Update: Locking Troubles

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 19:09:58 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85378

DRMI locked almost immediately after a second, manual initial alignment. Strange.

H1 General - OPS Midshift Update: Locking Troubles

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 19:08:12 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85377

It has been a difficult relock acquisition following our last lockloss due to a few reasons all related to the inability to lock DRMI:

1. Small local EQ showing up on both primary and secondary microseism.

2. ALSX PLL Crystal Beatnote insufficient for ALSX lock - this comes on and off and was happening largely in the first hour of lock aquisition. There were 9 locklosses at this state in IR, PRMI, DRMI and of course, LOCKING_ALS. I attempted to cycle through "enable/disable" for the ALSX FIBR LOCK on the ALSX PLL page, but this did not help. The issue seems to have largely went away on its own 45 minutes into trying.

3. DRMI/PRMI general alignment. The flashes are good, and I've seen DRMI lock in worse conditions. I touched the BS, PRM, PR2, SRM, SR2 in order to optimize the alignment further but this proved useless.

The first thing I did after the lockloss was to do a full initial alignment, since I heard that the PRMI ASC was fixed. Before my shift, we were having 45 minutes of issues locking DRMI but the initial alignment did not seem to fix this. After 2 hours of trying to touch suspensions, I have decided to do a step-through of initial alignment. I still allowed PRMI ASC to happen automatically (though will do manually if this lock attempt fails). This has just finished and I'm relocking now..

H1 General - Comment to Ops Day Shift End

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 17:59:13 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 85376

Just want to specify that the only beam diverter left open was the POP beam diverter! All other usually-closed beam diverters were closed.

LHO VE - Comment to Filter Cavity Tube Bad Gauge Removal and Replacement-Replacement

gerardo.moreno@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 17:58:23 -0700

Author: gerardo.moreno@ligo.org

Report ID: 85375

More photos of the MKS390 gauge due to new found features.

We found some features internal to the gauge, see attached photos, maybe when welding the conflat to the gauge body they did not use shielding gas internal to the gauge.

Future reference, we did a test on the gauge with an annealed copper gasket, no leaks detected above the 1.0e-10 torr*l/sec. So, if this gauge is deemed good we can use it, contacting vendor with lots of questions. Serial number 390F00495 is for the featured gauge on attached photos.

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Ops Day Shift End

oli.patane@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 17:52:08 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85374

TITLE: 06/27 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ibrahim
SHIFT SUMMARY:

Currently relocking and stuck not being able to get past DRMI due to it not wanting to lock and some previous ALSX crystal frequency issues. Ibrahim is working on trying to fix that.

When we went back into Observing after Commissioning today at 21:20 UTC, we had accidentally left the beam diverters open, and didn't notice for 20 minutes, so between 21:20 and 21:41 UTC the beam diverter was open. Once we noticed, we went out of Observing, closed it, and then went back ito Observing. tagging detchar

LOG:

14:30 Observing and have been Locked for 7.5 hours
14:38 Lockloss
15:40 NOMINAL_LOW_NOISE
   21:20 Observing after commissioning end
       - We had accidentally left the beam diverter open so this data may not be very good
   21:41 Out of Observing to close the beam diverter
   21:44 Back into Observing with everything looking good
22:29 Lockloss

DetChar

H1 SUS - Script to show difference in SUS noise before vs after SatAmp swap

oli.patane@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 17:39:08 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85369

In preparation for the SatAmp swap (ECR E2400330), I've written a script that allows us to easily compare the noise performance between satellite amplifier swaps. It takes in a suspension name, ifo, and two gpstimes, grabs the DAMP IN data for all dofs, regresses out the ISI GS13 noise, and then compares the leftover noise between the two gps times.

We wanted to have the script divide out the loop suppression, and Jeff looked into which suspensions we've taken valid open loop TFs for (85289). Some suspensions have valid OLTF measurements, so from those we were able to export the loop suppression to divide out (and are saved in the suspension's Data folders), but others don't have valid measurements, so I made it so if there is a valid measurement, it will divide it out from the regressed sensor noise data, otherwise it'll just show the regressed.

Here is an example of the suspension noise before and after a satellite amplifier swap for SR3 that was done at LLO last summer (72417). There was no loop suppression for us to divide out here, so the plots just show the DAMP IN and the leftover sensor noise.

Here is another example for LHO PR3. This one is only meant to be an example of the plots with the loop suppression removed, as the sat amp is the same for both gps times. There is some weirdness around where the peaks were supposed to be removed by the loop suppression - some dofs still show thin peaks. The loop suppression didn't remove them correctly, and we think this might be because the loop suppression assumes a SISO loop, but we might have cross coupling that then is not accounted for when we are dividing by the loop suppression.

The script is located in /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/Common/MatlabTools/damp_regression_compare.m, and is a function so it can be called from somewhere else. It has been committed as r12362.

The data that's pulled for the gps time and timespan for the sus dofs and chamber GS13s takes a while to grab the first tme, so I had it save the data in the respective suspension Data folders (ex. /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Data/dampRegress_H1PR3_M1_1405123218_1200.mat). Then if you need to run that gps time + span again it'll get the data right away.

The results get saved in the suspension's Results folder (ex. /ligo/svncommon/SusSVN/sus/trunk/HLTS/H1/PR3/SAGM1/Results/allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M1_NoiseComparison_1405123218vs1433376018-1200.pdf).

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

allDampRegressCompare_L1SUSPR3_M1_NoiseComparison_1405123218vs1433376018-1200.pdf

allDampRegressCompare_H1SUSPR3_M1_NoiseComparison_1405123218vs1433376018-1200.pdf

H1 CAL - Comment to Calibration Measurement June 26, 2025

francisco.llamas@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 16:47:38 -0700

Author: francisco.llamas@ligo.org

Report ID: 85371

After inspection on the sensing function from the initially generated report, we changed the model to an anti-spring and to start the fit at 8 Hz, to see if we could get a better calibration from this measurement.

First, we set the is_pro_spring parameter in the H1_pydarm.ini file from True to False. We expected this parameter make the model (orange line) fit better to the measurement (green dots). Overall, there was no noticeable change of the sensing model compared to the initial report, as seen in the first figure (CAL_SENSING_MODEL_ANTISPRING_20250626.png). Additionally, the sensing MCMC corner plots were not gaussian (opposite to what is instructed in T2400215 section 2.4.2), as seen in the second figure (CAL_SENSING_MCMC_CORNER_ANTISPRING_20250626.png).

To improve on the sensing model, we decreased the sensing parameter mcmc_fmin from 10 to 8 Hz. Even though the sensing function is slightly worse at low frequencies compared to the initial report (the one from oli's alog), the sensing corner plot shows more of a gaussian behavior. Additionally, the uncertainty is still within our 10% budget (see snippet of the calibration monitor from grafana CAL_MONITOR_GRAFANA_POST_CALMEAS_20250626.png), so we will pause on this investigation for now.

The updated report is attached as a PDF file. The measurement has not been tagged at the time of posting this comment. We have yet to understand why the model is struggling with the fit parameters.

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

H1_calibration_report_20250626T204210Z.pdf

H1 CDS - HWS camera control code running, EPICS monitoring via MEDM

david.barker@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 16:46:55 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85373

WP12637 Install HWS Camera Controls

TJ, Camilla, Dave:

I made a slight change to my original Dec 2023 hws_camera_control.py code to use the python epics module to do the cagets directly, and to also use this to add caputs which will try, in a non-blocking way, to send the camera's status to a central EPICS IOC.

The central IOC code is hws_camera_status_ioc.py which runs on cdsioc1 under puppet control.

The camera control code runs every minute in an infinite loop. Each loop it checks the status of H1 using Guardian ISC_LOCK (greater or equal to 600 denotes H1 LOCK). If H1 is locked and the camera is on, it turns the camera off. If H1 is not locked and the camera is off, it turns the camera on.

A mini-overview of the 4 HWS cameras (ITMX, ITMY, ETMX, ETMY) is available on the CDS Overview screen. The block is divided into 4 segments, each camera is shown either in SKYBLUE (camera is enabled, images are being taken) or GREEN (camera is disabled, no noise being created).

Note that the color scheme relates to what is nominal for OBSERVE. Green indicates the cameras have power, but their frame acquisition has been disabled.

Clicking on the HWS block on the CDS Overview opens a detailed screen (see attachment). For each camera this shows if the camera is powered (ETMY is the only one powered down) and if the camera is enabled. The control code also reports its current time, its uptime, its start time and details of where and how it is running.

Second attachment shows the four tmux sessions running the control code, and the arguments used.

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - Comment to Noise Budget injection inventory

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 16:29:04 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 85372

After running some PRCL injections to test the feedforward I was also able to update the PRCL noise budget template.

I also reran the jitter noise coupling measurement, since it seemed like the coupling was overestimated at low frequency. The jitter noise had been run very early on in vent recovery, so I am not sure what changed to affect the low frequency coupling (could be the pumps, LSC feedforward, ASC, etc) but now the low frequency coupling is very reduced.

H1 SUS - Results from applying ECR E2400330 to UK SatAmp S1100173 -- looks good!

jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 16:08:26 -0700

Author: jeffrey.kissel@ligo.org

Report ID: 85368

J. Kissel, F. Clara ECR E2400330 Fil modified the UK SatAmp (D0900900 / D0901284) per ECR E2400330, which means "rev'ing" up the D0901284 circuit board inside from -v4 to -v5 (thanks Michael Laxen for the updated drawing!). This mod changes the whitening stage frequency response by adjusting the (R180, R181, R182) values from (750,20e3,20e3) to (1.5e3,80.6e3,80.6e3) Ohm, causing the zero:pole pair to move from z:p = (0.384 : 10.6) Hz to z:p = (0.0969 : 5.31) Hz. I then measured the frequency response with the nearly*** identical procedure as described in LHO:85349. The measured results agree with the expected model of z:p = (0.0969 : 5.31) Hz (and a ~7 kHz high-frequency pole) to within +/-1.5% and +/-1.0 [deg], as was the case for the measured results when this same board was at -v4. I think we're good to go for rev'ing up many of these satamps, and can have excellent confidence in compensating every channel of every satamp with a z:p = (5.31 : 0.0969) Hz digital filter. ***The only difference is that I needed to drop the source voltage from 0.3 V_SRC to 0.2 V_SRC in order to prevent the differential output stage opamps from saturating. Note -- the saturated response was only ~7% different from expectation and only above the frequency-dependent output of the whitening stage exceeded the ~14V that the differential output opamps can push; I got clued in to this subtlety and have a quantitative answer because the ratio between saturated model and measurement sharply kinked up at 6.39 Hz, and rose up to 7% -- consistent across all four channels -- in a non-linear way that couldn't be explained by adding more zeros and poles. #ThreeHoursWasted

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

2025-06-26_UKSatAmpChar_S1100173_D09101284-v5_0p05to1000Hz_0p2VSEIN_DIFFOUT_SR785SN77461.pdf

2025-06-26_UKSatAmpChar_S1100173_D09101284-v5_0p05to1000Hz_0p2VSEIN_DIFFOUT_SR785SN77461_allresiduals.pdf

LHO General - OPS Eve Shift Start

ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 16:03:12 -0700

Author: ibrahim.abouelfettouh@ligo.org

Report ID: 85370

TITLE: 06/26 Eve Shift: 2330-0500 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Lock Acquisition
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Oli
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 20mph Gusts, 8mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.04 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.05 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

IFO is LOCKING at ACQUIRE_DRMI_1F

Planning on going straight to observing once locked.

Lockloss during comissioning (not from calibration)

H1 ISC - Comment to updating SRCL offset

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 15:47:10 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 85367

I wrote a summary of the SRM alignment moves here: 85366

H1 ISC - Comment to SRM alignment on POP vs AS72

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 15:46:32 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 85366

Today, Sheila and I followed up on this, and the results are a bit confusing, but somewhat promising.

To start, Sheila reran the "brontosaurus plot" measurement, where FIS is injected to help determine the SRCL offset. She reports this work here.

While she changed the SRCL offset, I once again monitored the AS RF72 and POP X signals. As Sheila changed the SRCL offset, the offset in POPX did change the same way as I saw yesterday, which is not that surprising.

Then, when Sheila set the SRCL offset to zero, I tried opening the SRC1 loop and moving SRM around. The first thing I noticed is that the calibration I calculated yesterday seems bad, since I was adjusting the SRM yaw by 11 urad (according to the slider calibration), but the change in the POP X yaw offset corresponded to less than 1 urad (according to my measured calibration from yesterday).

I moved yaw in only one direction, with the goal of seeing if I could reduce the POP X yaw offset. However, I gave up after 11 urad because it didn't seem to be doing much at all except to small effect on POP X yaw.

Next, I tried moving SRM in pitch. I went the positive direction, and Sheila and I immediately saw the buildups get worse, so then I went the other way and the buildups got better! This corresponded to a 20 urad change in SRM pitch, according to the alignment slider. The change in the POP X pitch offset was minimal.

We also saw kappa C increase quite a bit, almost too good to be true, so we didn't trust the value since we had a large SRCL detuning at the time. Sheila did see that the change in the SRM pitch had an effect on the squeezing as well.

However, Sheila then determined a better SRCL offset of -382, so we went there, and the kappa C leveled off to 1.02, which was better than our current nominal value of 1. This seemed to hold. Then, I stepped the SRM pitch offset back to the starting alignment and the buildups decreased and kappa C went back to 1.

Following the buildups, there seems to be a better alignment of the SRM in pitch. At this time it seems like yaw has no effect, but I only moved in one direction. I think that, whatever the SRCL offset is, we should move the SRM around in pitch and yaw and see if there is an improvement to be found in the buildups. My current hypothesis is that the RF72 dark offsets are creating some alignment offset in the SRC. After we find a good SRM alignment position, we can recheck the SRCL offset, hopefully with both a squeezing measurement and a sensing function.

We should also probably check the whitening on RF72, maybe next Tuesday.

These results are making me think that probably POP X Q would not make a good signal for SRC alignment, since it is dominated by the SRCL offset.

The first ndscope attached are showing the behavior of the POP X and RF72 signals while changing SRM alignment. The second shows the buildups and kappa C when changing SRM pitch and SRCL offset from 0 to -382.

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Lockloss

oli.patane@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 15:32:52 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85365

Lockloss at 2025-06-26 22:29 UTC after almost 7 hours

Lockloss

H1 ISC - Adjusted POP9 phase in full lock, semi-thermalized

elenna.capote@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 15:07:21 -0700

Author: elenna.capote@ligo.org

Report ID: 85363

Sheila, Elenna

I adjusted the POP9 phase to see if it would improve the coherence of LSC REFL RIN with DARM. In the past, this has been an indication of poor POP9 phasing causing some offset in PRCL.

I tried checking the phase in two ways. First, I engaged the 88 Hz notches in LSC and injected an 88 Hz PRCL line. This result indicated that the POP9 phasing was actually pretty good, in that the signal appeared in I and not Q. The dotted lines in this attachment show this measurement.

Next, I tried a different method, injecting a frequency noise line at 700 Hz. That method showed that there was some signal in Q. I was able to reduce the signal in Q by adjusting the demod phase. The attachment shows the start in dotted blue and red lines, and the end result in solid lines. Overall, this was 2.9 degree change, so not significant.

After that adjustment, I remeasured with the 88 Hz PRCL line and saw a very small difference, shown in the solid lines.

After all that, I am not sure I see a difference in the REFL RIN coherence. Nonetheless, this does seem slightly better, so I SDFed in safe and observe.

I realized after we went to observing that I forgot to unplug the frequency excitation cable. Sorry!

Images attached to this report

H1 CAL - Calibration Measurement June 26, 2025

oli.patane@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 14:50:22 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85364

Calibration suite was run after 5 hours of thermalization. Before the measurement was run, work had been done to update the SRCL offset (85362).

Broadband
Start: 2025-06-26 20:35:38 UTC
End: 2025-06-26 20:40:49 UTC
Data: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_BB/PCALY2DARM_BB_20250626T203538Z.xml

Simulines
Start: 2025-06-26 20:42:09 UTC
End: 2025-06-26 21:05:29 UTC
Data: /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/DARMOLG_SS/DARMOLG_SS_20250626T204210Z.hdf5
          /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/PCALY2DARM_SS/PCALY2DARM_SS_20250626T204210Z.hdf5
      /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L1_SS/SUSETMX_L1_SS_20250626T204210Z.hdf5
        /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L2_SS/SUSETMX_L2_SS_20250626T204210Z.hdf5
        /ligo/groups/cal/H1/measurements/SUSETMX_L3_SS/SUSETMX_L3_SS_20250626T204210Z.hdf5

Current version of the pydarm report can be found at /ligo/groups/cal/H1/reports/20250626T204210Z_prospring/H1_calibration_report_20250626T204210Z.pdf. We are investigating further into why the calibration is so different now.

Images attached to this report

Non-image files attached to this report

H1_calibration_report_20250626T204210Z.pdf

H1 ISC - updating SRCL offset

sheila.dwyer@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 13:39:29 -0700

Author: sheila.dwyer@ligo.org

Report ID: 85362

starting: 1435000693 (19:17:55 UTC) SRCL offset -455, no SRC ASC offsets.
no squeezing: 1435001081 (19:24-19:32 UTC)

measured NLG with seed of 14.15, had to adjust temperature

SRCL offset -200, no ASC offsets, 1435001999 (19:39 UTC) angle scan: here
SRCL offset 0, no ASC offsets 1435002482 (19:47:44 UTC) angle scan: here

Fitting to SRCL detuning guesses for these last two points would suggest we should update our SRCL offset to -382 counts (was previously -455). We will do this now, as we are about to run a calibration measurement.

While we were at 0 SRCL offset, Elenna looked at the impact of SRM alignment, she will alog this. It does seem to have an impact of FIS, which is small compared to the impact of the SRC length offset.

-382, SRM alignment restored 1435004862 20:27:24 UTC

SQZ

Images attached to this report

H1 SQZ - checking on squeezer alignment

sheila.dwyer@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 12:09:12 -0700

Author: sheila.dwyer@ligo.org

Report ID: 85358

scan alignment using anti-squeeze: results final alignment sliders and sqz angle screenshot

scan alignment using squeezing: results final sliders screenshot

The biggest difference between these alignments is 30urad of ZM6 yaw, and almost 4 degrees of squeezing angle. We've seen before that the demod phase we need to get the best squeezing angle depends on the ZM alignment, although we think this shouldn't be the case since we are using OMC trans RF3 to control the squeezing angle to reduce the impact of higher order modes on the squeezing angle.

The spectrum comparison shows slightly flatter squeezing after we ran the alignment using squeezing than anti-squeezing. I've left it this way for now.

After this Elenna and I looked at the SQZ to IFO ASC. We found that AS42 B was sensitive to ZM4 for both pitch and yaw, while AS42 A was sensitive to ZM6. We set offsets in AS42 PIT and YAW filter banks to close the loops around the location that the SCAN_ALINGMENT guardian gave us, this worked with the settings shown in the two attachments.

I've set the SQZ ASC flag to true, we can see if this works during thermalization next time we relock.

Images attached to this report

H1 TCS - Comment to 2Hz Comb in DARM from ITMX HWS Camera?

kiet.pham@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 11:58:27 -0700

Author: kiet.pham@ligo.org

Report ID: 85361

The 2 Hz comb is still present in H1:GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_CLEAN after the voltage change (before the software update)

Images attached to this report

H1 ISC - Comment to Histogram of Time spent in ACQUIRE_DRMI_1F

jenne.driggers@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 11:38:39 -0700

Author: jenne.driggers@ligo.org

Report ID: 85360

I copied Tony's awesome spreadsheet, and replotted the data sets while thinking about what they mean.

I have the same 4 data sets that Tony has (Jan-April, All of June, and then broken into Early June and Late June, with the divider being the time that I enabled the 'slow let go' of the BS pitch control). However, I've got all the x-axes fixed to be 0-25 minutes. I've also set the y-axes to be (0, number lock segments), so that they are roughly normalized. In the subtitle of the plot I note the percentage of the segments who are 10 mins or longer (actually, from the data set, the percent that have a value of 9 mins or greater). Since we have a 10 minute timer in the guardian that will flip over to trying PRMI or MICH locking, this percentage should help capture the number of locks that take a long time to acquire DRMI.

Notably, the number of segments that take a long time is about 2x larger after the BS slow let go was enabled, if we look at the percent in late June (48% take a long time) versus the percent in early June (28% take a long time) :( But, both of these are much higher than the 18% that took a long time before the vent.

This may mean that the slow letting go of the BS, as currently enabled, is not helpful.

If the statecounter.py code is able to, it could be interesting to get similar statistics, but have the durations start when we leave state 18 (Arms_off_resonance) and the duration end when we get to state 102 (DRMI_locked_check_ASC). That would enable us to more accurately see the total length of time it takes during an acquisition sequence. If we do this, we'd want to count and then exclude from the statistics the number of times we 'give up' and lose lock or do an initial alignment.

Images attached to this report

LHO VE - Thu CP1 Fill

david.barker@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 10:30:57 -0700

Author: david.barker@ligo.org

Report ID: 85359

Thu Jun 26 10:13:36 2025 INFO: Fill completed in 13min 32secs

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Comment to Lockloss

oli.patane@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:47:44 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85357

15:40 UTC Back to Nominal Low Noise

H1 General - Lockloss

oli.patane@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 07:45:51 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85356

Lockloss at 2025-06-26 14:38 UTC after 7.5 hours locked due to an ETMX glitch

Lockloss

Images attached to this report

H1 General - Ops Day Shift Start

oli.patane@ligo.org — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 07:31:32 -0700

Author: oli.patane@ligo.org

Report ID: 85355

TITLE: 06/26 Day Shift: 1430-2330 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 149Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: TJ
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
    SEI_ENV state: CALM
    Wind: 5mph Gusts, 2mph 3min avg
    Primary useism: 0.01 μm/s
    Secondary useism: 0.05 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:

Observing at 150Mpc and have been Locked for 7.5 hours. Commissioning again today from 15:00 - 21:00 UTC.