Closeup checklist

X arm aligned for IR/GR

The X arm was also aligned for the IR by hand and ASS. Also the X end green PZT was aligned to make the TEM00 mode reasonably locked.

What I did:

- Looked at the ITMXF camera. It seemed that the green beam was hitting the mirror.

- Went to the end. Looked at the X end green REFL. Tuned coarse alignment of the ETMX so that the beam was (retro-)reflected to the Faraday and the REFL PD.

- Looked at the ETMX face from the view port. Tried to locate the spot from the ITMX by shaking the ITMX alignment with 0.1 and then 0.01 increments.

- After some struggle with the ETMX and ITMX alignment, resonant fringes were found on the ETMY face while I still looked at the ETMX.

- Once the ITMX/ETMX were aligned, the BS needed to be aligned. But of course there was no IR fringe.

- Returned to the original alignment of the ITMX to find the ITMX spot on the AS camera.
Then gradually moved the ITMX to the aligned value for the green while tracking the michelson alignment with the BS.
This made the AS spots at the upper left edge of the AS video image.

- This was enough to find the IR spikes at TRX. Then the ETMX was touched to maximize the transmission.

- Lock the cavity. Use the ASS to optimize the alignement.

- Once the arm mirrors were aligned, the Xend PZT was also adjusted to have TEM00 for the green beam.

Now I leave the IFO with ITMX/Y, ETMX/Y and BS aligned. As I wrote above, the AS spot is very high at the AS camera.
We need to revisit the AS steering (SR TTs?) to ensure the AS beam unclipped.

9593

Mon Feb 3 23:31:33 2014

Manasa

Alignment update / Y arm locked

[EricQ, Manasa, Koji]

We measured the spot positions on the MC mirrors and redid the MC alignment by only touching the MC mirror sliders. Now all the MC spots are <1mm away from the center.

We opened the ITMY and ETMY chambers to align the green to the arm. The green was already centered on the ITMY. We went back and forth to recenter the green on the ETMY and ITMY (This was done by moving the test masses in pitch and yaw only without touching the green pointing) until we saw green flashes in higher order modes. At this point we found the IR was also centered on the ETMY and a little low in pitch on ITMY. But we could see IR flashes on the ITMYF camera. We put back the light doors and did the rest of the alignment using the pitch and yaw sliders.

When the flashes were as high as 0.05, we started seeing small lock stretches. Playing around with the gain and tweaking the alignment, we could lock the Y arm in TEM00 for IR and also run the ASS. The green also locked to the arm in 00 mode at this point. We aligned the BS to get a good AS view on the camera. ITMX was tweaked to get good michelson.

9592

Mon Feb 3 15:57:52 2014

There was 0.2 mW green at the X end.

The doubling oven temp was changed from 37.5 to 36 degrees C

Power at green shutter 3 mW The alignment was not touched.

Attachment 1: ETMXgreen.jpg

Attachment 2: XgreenOven36C.jpg

9591

Mon Feb 3 10:17:14 2014

Please wet WIPE before opening chamber or optical table ! !

with methanol soaked kimwipes.

The Met One particle counter is located on CES wall, just behind ITMX chamber.

The numbers are not so bad, but have you ( ...a) asked the IFO lately?

Attachment 1: AP-ISCT.jpg

Attachment 2: BSC-rim.jpg

Attachment 3: ITMX-ISCT.jpg

Attachment 4: 12daysAtm.png

9590

Fri Jan 31 19:29:36 2014

Today we measured the missing distance to reconstruct SRC length.

I also changed the way the mirror positions are reconstructed. In total for PRC and SRC we took 13 measurements between different points. The script runs a global fit to these distances based on eight distances and four incidence angles on PR2, PR2, SR2 and SR3. The optimal values are those that minimize the maximum error of the 13 measurements with respect to the ones reconstructed on the base of the parameters. The new script is attached (sorry, the code is not the cleanest one I ever wrote...)

The reconstructed distances are:

Reconstructed lengths [mm]:
LX = 6771
LY = 6734
LPRC = 6752
LX-LY = 37
LSX = 5493
LSY = 5456
LSRC = 5474

The angles of incidence of the beam on the mirrors are very close to those coming from the CAD drawing (within 0.15 degrees):

Reconstructed angles [deg]:
aoi PR3 = 41.11 (CAD 41)
aoi PR2 = 1.48 (CAD 1.5)
aoi SR3 = 43.90 (CAD 44)
aoi SR2 = 5.64 (CAD 5.5)

The errors in the measured distances w.r.t. the reconstructed one are all smaller than 1.5 mm. This seems a good check of the global consistency of the measurement and of the reconstruction method.

NOTES: in the reconstruction, the BS is assumed to be exactly at 45 degrees; wedges are not considered.

Attachment 1: map_jan31st.pdf

Attachment 2: survey_v3.zip

9589

Fri Jan 31 18:41:25 2014

[EricQ, Gabriele, Manasa]

We found we had lost the Y arm pointing from yesterday. We tried to recover the pointing for a couple of hours and finally decided to take the ETMY heavy door off.

The input beam was aligned to the Y arm. We also got AS and REFL out of vacuum and on the cameras.

We put back the light doors and tried to lock the arms, but did not succeed as yet.

Things to do:
1. Lock arms for IR
2. Realign POP path
3. Recenter all oplevs
4. Try to check the state of PRC after the length change
5. Take in-vacuum pictures

9588

Thu Jan 30 19:00:25 2014

[Manasa, EricQ, Gabriele]

Today we changed the PRC length translating PR2 by 27 mm in the direction of the corner. After this movement we had to realign the PRC cavity to get the beam centered on PRM, PR2, PR3, BS (with apertures) and ITMY (with aperture). To realign we had to move a bit both PR2 and PR3. ~~We could also see some flashes back from the ETMY~~ . //Edit by Manasa : We could see the ETMY reflection close to the center of the ITMY but the arm is not aligned or flashing as yet//.

After the realignment we measured again the PRC length with the same method of yesterday. We only had to change one of the length to measure, because it was no more accessible today. The new map is attached as well as the new script (the script contains also the SRC length estimation, with random numbers in it).

The new PRC length is 6753 mm, which is exactly our target!

The consistency checks are within 5 mm, which is not bad.

We also measured some distances to estimate the SRC length, but right now I'm a bit confused looking at the notes and it seems there is one missing distance (number 1 in the notes). We'll have to check it again tomorrow.

Attachment 1: map_jan30.pdf

Attachment 2: survey_v3_jan30.m

clear all


global sos_lx sos_ly sos_cx sos_cy tt_lx ...
       tt_ly tt_cx tt_cy sos_sx sos_sy sos_dy

%% Survey of the PRC+SRC lengths %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%% measured distances
d_MB2_MY  = 2114 + 27 + 9;

... 446 more lines ...

9587

Thu Jan 30 11:59:03 2014

Quote:

Since this morning, the fb's timing has been off. Steve pointed it out to me earlier today, but I didn't have a chance to look at it until now.

This was different from the more common problem of the mx stream needing to be restarted - that causes 3 red blocks per core, on all cores on a computer, but it doesn't have to be every computer. This was only one red block per core in the CDS FE status screen, but it was on every core on every computer.

The error message, when you click into the details of a single core, was 0x4000. I elog searched for that, and found elog 6920, which says that this is a timing issue with the frame builder. Since Jamie had already set things on nodus' config correctly, all I did was reconnect the fb to the ntp:

fb$ sudo /etc/init.d/ntp-client restart

As in elog 6920, the daqd stopped, then restarted itself, and cleared the error message. It looks like everything is good again.

I suspect (without proof) that this may have to do with the campus network being down this morning, so the computers couldn't sync up with the outside world.

The above timing problem has been repeating (a couple of times this week so far). It does not seem to be related to the campus network.

The same solution was applied.

9586

Wed Jan 29 21:01:03 2014

Gabriele

PRC length measurement analysis

[Manasa, EricQ, Gabriele]

We managed to measure the PRC length using a procedure close to the one described in slog 9573.

We had to modify a bit the reference points, since some of them were not accessible. The distances between points into the BS chamber were measured using a ruler. The distances between points on different chambers were measured using the Leica measurement tool. In total we measured five distances, shown in green in the attached map.

We also measured three additional distances that we used to cross check the results. These are shown in the map in magenta.

The values of the optical lengths we measured are:

LX = 6828.96 mm
LY = 6791.74 mm
LPRC = 6810.35 mm
LX-LY = 37.2196 mm

The three reference distances are computed by the script and they match well the measured one, within half centimeter:

M32_MP1 = 117.929 mm (measured = 119 mm)
MP2_MB3 = 242.221 mm (measured = 249 mm)
M23_MX1p = 220.442 mm (measured = 226 mm)

See the attached map to see what the names correspond to.

The nominal PRC length (the one that makes SB resonant without arms) can be computed from the IMC length and it is 6777 mm. So, the power recycling cavity is 33 mm too long w.r.t. the nominal length. This is in good agreement with the estimate we got with the SB splitting method (4cm).

According to the simulation in the wiki page the length we want to have the SB resonate when the arms are there is 6753 mm. So the cavity is 57 mm too long.

Attached the new version of the script used for the computation.

Attachment 1: map.pdf

Attachment 2: script.zip

9585

Wed Jan 29 16:36:37 2014

High power beam blasting of the aLIGO RFPD

[Rich, Jay, Koji]

We blasted the aLIGO RF PD with a 1W IR beam. We did not find any obvious damage.
Rich and Jay brought the PD back to Downs to find any deterioration of the performance with careful tests.

The power modulation setup is at the rejection side of the PBS in front of the laser source.
I checked the beams are nicely damped.
As they may come back here tomorrow, a power supply and a scope is still at the MC side of the PSL enclosure.

9584

Tue Jan 28 23:32:12 2014

X/Y arm locked with the IR beam

[Koji EricQ]

The both arms have been locked with IR and aligned by ASS.

The IFO was left with ITMX/Y, ETMX/Y, BS, and PRM aligned, and the PSL shutter closed.

YARM
SIGNAL PATH: POY11I(+45dB)->YARM(G=+1.0)->ETMY
NORM: TRYx10
TRIG: TRY 0.01up/0.005down
FM TRIG: FM2/3/6/7/8/9 0.01up/0.05down, 0.5 sec delay

XARM
SIGNAL PATH: POX11I(+45dB)->XARM(G=+4.0)->ETMX
NORM: TRXx10
TRIG: TRX 0.01up/0.005down
FM TRIG: FM2/3/6/7/8/9 0.01up/0.05down, 0.5 sec delay

For decent locks, it was necessary that the offset of the error signals are trimmed at the input filters
even after running LSCoffset.py script.

Once the cavities were aligned for the IR, we could see the green beams are also flashing.
The Y arm was actually locked with the green with a TEM00 mode

Attachment 1: good_alignment.png

9583

Tue Jan 28 22:24:46 2014

[Masasa, ericq]

Having no luck doing things remotely, we went into the ITMX chamber and roughly aligned the IR beam. Using the little sliding alignment target, we moved the BS to get the IR beam centered on ITMX, then moved ITMX to get good michelson fringes with ITMY. Using an IR card, found the retroflection and moved ETMX to make it overlap with the beam transmitted through the ITM. With the PRM flashing, X-arm cavity flashes could be seen. So, at that point, both the y-arm and x-arm were flashing low order modes.

9582

Tue Jan 28 16:26:40 2014

vacuum computers are back without safety

Quote:

[Steve Koji]

We pushed the reset button of c1vac1 and c1vac2 and the vacuum screen is back.

First, we pushed the reset button of c1vac1 and pushed the one on c1vac2.
This did not bring c1vac2 up. We pushed the reset of c1vac2 again and now everything of the vacuum screen is back.

1, Reset works

2, Default values are lost. They actually reversed into open and turn on everything when power recycle c1vac1, c1vac2 or 24V dc power supply. This can vent the IFO in an event of power failure!

It's may be the time to go back to an isolated, vacuum controller only computer.

The present valve configuration at Atm1

a, all annuloses are vented

b, valve cables disconnected at: VC1 and 4 IP gate valves

c, the RGA is off and it is pumped by the Maglev through VM2

d, cryo pump is being roughed with TP3 It's outgassing rate was 25 mTorr / min

e, Roughing hose is disconnected

Attachment 1: c1vac1_vac2areback.png

9581

Tue Jan 28 11:13:50 2014

vacuum monitor is still blank

[Steve Koji]

We pushed the reset button of c1vac1 and c1vac2 and the vacuum screen is back.

First, we pushed the reset button of c1vac1 and pushed the one on c1vac2.
This did not bring c1vac2 up. We pushed the reset of c1vac2 again and now everything of the vacuum screen is back.

9580

Tue Jan 28 09:51:47 2014

PSL output is stable.

Attachment 1: IOO4dlowpr.png

9579

Mon Jan 27 21:36:35 2014

After turning the slow FSS threshold down, the mode cleaner stays locked enough to do other things. We were able to align the tip tilts to the y-arm such that we were able to get some flashes in what looks like a TM00-ish mode. (It was necessary to align the PRM such that there was some extra power circulating in the PRC to be able to see the IR flashes on the ITMY face camera) This is enough to convince us that we are at least near a reasonable alignment, even though we couldn't lock to the mode.

The x-arm was in a hairier situation; since the green beam wouldn't flash into any modes, we don't even know that a good cavity axis exists. So, I used the green input PZTs to shine the green beam directly on the earthquake stops on the ITMX cage, and then inferred the PZT coordinates that would place the green beam roughly on the center of ITMX. I moved the ETMX face camera such that it points at the ETMX baffle. I tried looking for the retroreflected green spot to no avail. Hopefully tomorrow, we can get ourselves to a reasonably aligned state, so we can begin measuring the macroscopic PRC length.

9578

Mon Jan 27 17:49:46 2014

rana

Computer Scripts / Programs

sendmail started on nodus: fixing SwiftMail on Dokuwiki

Since the recent filesystem fracas, the new accounts could not be created on nodus / dokuwiki (for the controls workshop, for example).

I started sendmail on nodus using the command: sudo /etc/init.d/sendmail start

and the SwiftMail plugin on there is now sending out the confirmation emails again. This will happen each time we reboot nodus, so let's replace it.

9577

Mon Jan 27 12:26:00 2014

IOO Slow Actuator Servo threshold changed

IOO

In order to activate the slow actuator servo for the MC locking,
the threshold level for this servo (C1:PSL-FSS_LOCKEDLEVEL) was changed from 10000 to 700.

Now the servo started to move the PZT fast out to be controlled to 5V.

9576

Mon Jan 27 09:08:00 2014

Attachment 1: day4atm.png

Attachment 2: vent76bgTp3d4.png

9575

Sat Jan 25 21:09:16 2014

gabriele

Procedure to measure PRC length

I know the drawing is wrong. I put random distances, not realistic ones, and I did not try to get something close to reality. Once we put the measured distances, the drawing should (hopefully) be correct.

9574

Fri Jan 24 13:10:12 2014

Jamie

Procedure to measure PRC length

Quote:

I wrote a MATLAB script that takes as input the measured distances and produce the optical path lengths. The script also produce a drawing of the setup as reconstructed, showing the measurement points, the mirrors, the reference base plates, and the beam path. Here is an example output, that can be used to understand which are the five distances to be measured. I used dummy measured distances to produce it.

This path does not look correct to me. Maybe it's because this is supposed to represent "optical path lengths" as opposed to actual physical location of optics, but I think locations should be checked. For instance, PRM looks like it's floating in mid-air between the BS and ITMX chambers, and PR2 is not located behind ITMX. Actually, come to think of it, it might just be that ITMX (or the ITMs in general) is in the wrong place?

Here is a similar diagram I produced when building a Finesse model of the 40m, based on the CAD drawing that Manasa is maintaining:

9573

Fri Jan 24 12:44:25 2014

Gabriele

Procedure to measure PRC length

Here is how to measure the PRC length with a set of distance measurements in the optical setup.

We need to take distance measurements between reference points on each mirror suspension. For the large ones (SOS) that are used for BS, PRM and ITMs, the reference points are the corners of the second rectangular base: not the one directly in contact with the optical bench (since the chamfers make difficult to define a clear corner), but the rectangular one just above it. For the small suspensions (TT) the points are directly the corners of the base plates.

From the mechanical drawings of the two kind of suspensions I got the distances between the mirror centers and the reference corners. The mirror is not centered in the base, so it is a good idea to cross check if the numbers are correct with some measurements on the dummy suspensions.

I assumed the dimensions of the mirrors, as well as the beam incidence angles are known and we don't need to measure them again. Small errors in the angles should have small impact on the results.

In red the beam path in vacuum and in magenta the beam path in the substrate. The mirrors are the blue rectangles inside the reference bases which are in black. The thick lines are the HR faces. The green points are the measurement points and the green lines the distances to be measured. The names on the measurement lines are those used in the MATLAB script.

The MATLAB scripts are attached to this elog. The main file is survey_v2.m, which contains all the parameters and the measured values. Update it with the real numbers and run it to get the results, including the graphic output. The other files are auxiliary functions to create the graphics. I checked many times the code and the computations, but I can't be sure that there are no errors, since there's no way to check if the output is correct... The plot is produced in a way which is somehow independent from the computations, so if it makes sense this gives at least a self consistency test.

Attachment 2: survey_v2.m

global sos_lx sos_ly sos_cx sos_cy tt_lx tt_ly tt_cx tt_cy

%% Survey of the PRC length

%% measured distances
d_MB2_MY  = 2000.0;
d_MB3_MX  = 2000.0;
d_MB1_M31 = 400.0;
d_M32_M21 = 3000.0;
d_M22_MP  = 2000.0;

... 210 more lines ...

Attachment 3: distance.m

function d = distance(c1, c2)
    d = sqrt(sum((c1-c2).^2));
end

Attachment 4: draw_beam.m

function draw_beam(c1, c2, color)
    plot( [c1(1), c2(1)], [c1(2), c2(2)], color, 'LineWidth', 2)
end

Attachment 5: draw_measurement.m

function draw_measurement(c1, c2, color, name)
    plot( [c1(1), c2(1)], [c1(2), c2(2)], color)
    text( (c1(1)+c2(1))/2, (c1(2)+c2(2))/2 + 20, name, ...
        'FontSize', 5, 'HorizontalAlignment', 'center', ...
         'VerticalAlignment', 'middle')
end

Attachment 6: draw_point.m

function draw_point(c)
    plot(c(1), c(2), 'go', 'LineWidth', 2, 'MarkerSize', 3);
end

Attachment 7: draw_sos.m

function draw_sos(C, angle)
    global sos_lx sos_ly sos_cx sos_cy tt_lx tt_ly tt_cx tt_cy

    c(:,1) = [-sos_lx/2, -sos_ly/2 + sos_cy-sos_ly/2]';
    c(:,2) = [-sos_lx/2, sos_ly/2 + sos_cy-sos_ly/2]';
    c(:,3) = [sos_lx/2, sos_ly/2 + sos_cy-sos_ly/2]';
    c(:,4) = [sos_lx/2, -sos_ly/2 + sos_cy-sos_ly/2]';
    c(:,5) = [-sos_lx/2, -sos_ly/2 + sos_cy-sos_ly/2]';
    
    m_lx = 25.4*2;

... 18 more lines ...

Attachment 8: draw_tt.m

function draw_tt(C, angle)
    global sos_lx sos_ly sos_cx sos_cy tt_lx tt_ly tt_cx tt_cy

    c(:,1) = [-tt_lx/2, -tt_ly/2 + tt_cy-tt_ly/2]';
    c(:,2) = [-tt_lx/2, tt_ly/2 + tt_cy-tt_ly/2]';
    c(:,3) = [tt_lx/2, tt_ly/2 + tt_cy-tt_ly/2]';
    c(:,4) = [tt_lx/2, -tt_ly/2 + tt_cy-tt_ly/2]';
    c(:,5) = [-tt_lx/2, -tt_ly/2 + tt_cy-tt_ly/2]';
    
    m_lx = 25.4;

... 18 more lines ...

9572

Thu Jan 23 23:10:19 2014

[ericq, Manasa, Jenne]

Summary: We opened up the BS and both ITM chambers today, and put the light doors on. //Edit : Manasa Post-vent the MC was very much misaligned in yaw. Both the ITMs moved in pitch as inferred from the oplev; but there is still light on the oplev PDs//. We toiled with the PMC and mode cleaner for a while to get reasonable transmission and stability (at least for a period of time). We then tried to lock IR to the y-arm, to no avail.

Locking the PMC doesn't seem very robust with the low power level we have; adjusting the gain at all when it's locked throws it right out. The mode cleaner spot was visibly moving around on MC2 as well. We'll continue tomorrow.

Details about alignment efforts: Manasa and I tried for a while to try and align the y-arm for IR. Straight out of venting the green TM00 would lock to the y-arm with about .45, as compared to .8 before venting, so it didn't seem to drift too far. The x-arm would even flash any modes, however. For a while, IR was no where to be seen after the mode cleaner. Eventually, we used the tip tilts to bring the AS beam onto the camera, which exhibited fringes, so we knew we were hitting the ITMs somewhere. We wandered around with the ETM to see if any retroflection was happening, and saw the IR beam scatter off of the earthquake stop. We moved it to the side to see it hitting the OSEM holder, and moved down to the bottom OSEM holder to get an idea of where to put pitch to get roughly the center of the ITM, then undid the yaw motion.

There, we would see very infrequent, weak flashes. We weren't able to distinguish the mode shape though; however, the flashes were coincident with where the green would lock to a very yaw-misaligned fishbone mode, to the lower right of the optic's center. We figured that if we gradually fixed the green alignment with the mode shapes we could see and actually lock on, we could use the tip tilts to adjust the IR pointing and keep it coincident and eventually resonate more. However, this didn't really work out. The flashes were very infrequent, and at this point the PMC/MC were getting very touchy, and would cease to stay locked for more than a minute or two. At this point, we stopped for the day.

9571

Thu Jan 23 13:23:10 2014

40m IFO is at atmosphere

Quote:

There is BLANK VacControl_BAK.adl screen only.

I can move a valve by disconnecting it's solenoid power if it's position is normally open.

I will close V1 and check computer cable connections and move on with manual - hand disconnect ea valve to be moved into the right position for vent. Valve positions will be confirmed by looking manual indicators on valves.

The 40m vacuum envelope vent is completed with instrument grade air.

Valve configuration: chamber open, RGA is pumped through VM3 by TP3,

9570

Thu Jan 23 08:04:04 2014

vacuum control screen is blank

There is BLANK VacControl_BAK.adl screen only.

I can move a valve by disconnecting it's solenoid power if it's position is normally open.

Attachment 1: pd76m170d2dRgaOn.png

9568

Wed Jan 22 20:00:41 2014

Steve, please begin the vent!!

[EricQ, Jenne]

We have followed the pre-vent checklist, and done everything except check the jam nuts (which Steve can do in the morning).

We are ready to vent, so Steve, please begin bringing us up to atmosphere first thing in the morning.

Here is a copy of the list, from the wiki:

~~Center all oplevs/IPPOS/IPANG~~

~~Align the arm cavities for IR and align the green lasers to the arms.~~ (Green powers were both ~0.8. We only touched the Xend PZTs remotely, did not touch Yend).

~~Make a record of the MC pointing~~

Align the beam at the PSL angle and position QPDs (Did not need doing, left QPDs as-is so we keep our long-term trend.)

~~Reduce input power by touching wave plate on the PSL table BEFORE THE PMC~~. (HWP was at 269degrees, now at 3 hundred something to make power just before PSL shutter 90mW)

~~Replace 10% BS before MC REFL PD with Y1 mirror and lock MC at low power.~~

~~Close shutter of PSL-IR and green shutters at the ends~~

Make sure the jam nuts are protecting bellows

Attachment 1: IFOstatus_lowPower_preVent.png

9567

Wed Jan 22 18:17:46 2014

Since this morning, the fb's timing has been off. Steve pointed it out to me earlier today, but I didn't have a chance to look at it until now.

fb$ sudo /etc/init.d/ntp-client restart

As in elog 6920, the daqd stopped, then restarted itself, and cleared the error message. It looks like everything is good again.

I suspect (without proof) that this may have to do with the campus network being down this morning, so the computers couldn't sync up with the outside world.

9566

Wed Jan 22 16:36:45 2014

ericq

RF distribution box power button fail

Electronics

Quote:

Rana, Gabriele and I are trying to measure the FSR of the PRC (elog about that later), and we turned off the power to the RF generation box so that we could switch cables at the EOM combiner. However, as in elog 9101, the power button won't latch when we try to turn the power back on. All 3 of us tried, to no avail. For our measurement, poor Gabriele is standing holding the button pushed in, so that we can have some RF sidebands.

Tomorrow, we'll have to pull the RF generation box, and put in a better switch.

I replaced the stupid broken fancy button with a simple sturdy switch. I had to file out the hole in the chassis a bit, but the switch is pressed in tightly and securely. I put the box back in the rack, but the power cable was coming directly from the power supplies with no fuses. The box was drawing ~.9 and 1.5 Amps from two supplies, so I put 2A fuses on both. Plugged everything back in, and the mode cleaner locks, so it looks like all is well.

RXA: When its so close, I prefer to size it up by 1 step. Please change to 5A fuses. Otherwise, we may blow them from power glitches.

Q: 5A fuses have been swapped in

9565

Wed Jan 22 15:24:11 2014

Rga scan after reboot

Quote:

[Jenne, Steve]

Steve noticed that the RGA was not logging data and that not all the correct connection lights were on, and he wasn't able to run the "RGAset.py" script (in ...../scripts/RGA/) that sets up the proper parameters.

I looked, and the computer was not mounting the file system. I did a remote shutdown, then Steve went in and pushed the power button to turn the machine back on. After it booted up, it was able to talk to the file system, so I started ..../scripts/RGA/RGAset.py . The first 2 times I ran the script, it reported errors, but the 3rd time, it reported no communication errors. So, now that the computer can again talk to the file system, it should be able to run the cronjob, which is set to take data at 4am every day. Steve will check in the morning to confirm that the data is there. (The last data that's logged is 22Dec2013, 4am, which is right around when Koji reported and then fixed the file system).

We are venting tomorrow. This give us an opportunity to fix sick vacuum controller computer. Jamie volunteered.

Remember to rough down cryo and ion pump volumes. Their pressure can be at 1 Torr range after years of accumulated outgassing. Without total valve controls it is dangerous to have these air pockets. Some of their gate valves can be leaking and that would explane the slower pumpdown speed.

Attachment 1: Rgascan169dwarmingup.png

Attachment 2: BlankMedmMustBeFixed.png

9564

Wed Jan 22 09:05:42 2014

Yesterday night I plugged back the REFL11 RF cable into the corresponding demodulation board.

9563

Tue Jan 21 19:41:59 2014

Jenne

RF distribution box power button fail

Electronics

Tomorrow, we'll have to pull the RF generation box, and put in a better switch.

9562

Tue Jan 21 17:26:59 2014

Jenne

Rebooted RGA computer and reset RGA settings

[Jenne, Steve]

9561

Fri Jan 17 11:44:25 2014

Gabriele

More length measurements, more confusion

I analyzed the data taken yesterday.

The AS11 data in PRMI configuration is very bad, while the AS55 seems good enough:

The phase differences are

AS11 = 21 +- 18 degrees (almost useless due to the large error)

AS55 = 11.0 +- 0.4 degrees

The AS55 phase difference is not the same measured in the last trial, but about half of it. The new length estimates are:

AS11 = 3.2 +- 2.8 cm

AS55 = 0.47 +- 0.01 cm

We can probably forget about the AS11 measurement, but the AS55 result is different from the previous estimate... Maybe this is due to the fact that Eric adjusted the PRCL offset, but then we're going in the wrong direction....

9560

Thu Jan 16 21:38:13 2014

ericq

Repeat of PRC length measurement

[ericq,Jenne]

Since we don't have agreement between the measurements we made the other day and the earlier estimations, I wanted to repeat the demodulation angle measurement. We had to do a few things to keep the PRMI locked, since in the last few days, it hasn't been stable enough.

The mode cleaner had been very fussy lately; the WFS were pushing in a way that caused fast oscillations of the transmission and reflection powers. I turned off the servos, manually aligned the mode cleaner to transmission of about 15k and refl of about .4, centered the beams on the WFS QPDs, and turned the loops back on. Things were much stable after that. Also, Jenne noticed that the PMC loop had walked the laser PZT temperature to a bad place, and fixed it.

After aligning the carrier locked PRMI, the last piece needed to get things stable enough for sideband locking was turning off the angular damping on the PRM suspension screen (this was turned back on when we were done). Waiting until evening noise levels probably helped too. We used a 1000 count MICH excitation in the PRMI case, and recorded data for about a minute in one degree steps around the demodulation phase that looked to put the excitation entirely within the Q of the PD. Also, we notched out the excitation frequency in the MICH servo bank for today's measurement; I think it's outside of the loop bandwidth anyways, but it's good to be sure.

Jenne and I pondered a bit whether changing the AS55 demodulation phase while it (AS55 Q) is being used as the MICH control signal introduces subtleties that we haven't anticipated, but couldn't come up with anything concrete. Changing the angle from the what maximizes the Q just looks like a slight change in MICH gain, and shouldn't affect the phase of the excitation signal on the PD...

In any case, the data have been recorded, and the results will follow soon.

9559

Thu Jan 16 08:19:29 2014

4.4 and 3.8M local earth quakes

PEM

It looks like there was a 4.4 magnitude earthquake near Fontana, CA around 1:30am today. This tripped all of the suspension watchdogs, which Q has just now re-enabled.

Earth quake shake down yesterday Atm1

Atm2, today's shake

Attachment 1: local4.4eq.png

Attachment 2: local3.8eq.png

9558

Wed Jan 15 18:42:57 2014

Jenne