I plotted the 10-hour data obtained by the data logger and compared with the trend.

Apparently the Ch2 (corresponds to BF H2) is noisy.

Other than that, I could not find the time the outputs became zeros during the measurement, while the trend data shows that PRM was operated in the ALIGNED state for a while.
I do not know why this happens. Do I misunderstand the time of the observation?

More investigation is required.

Nakagaki, Miyo

We found wrong cable connection on the LVDT driver for BF-damper of PRM. The cable for the secondary coil and the cable for the primary coil are swapped.

This wrong cabling may be happen in the re-installation (klog#6499) without any cabling diagram or cabling procedure.

I think wrong cabling on the LVDT driver could be acceptable in the LVDT coils for GAS or IP because the LVDT coils and actuator coil are separated.

Hoever, in the case of BF-damper, they are mixing the actuation signal and the modulation signal of LVDT readout in the primary coil. I'm not sure whether this wrong cabling is acceptable or not for BF-damper.

(The cabling of other Type-Bp are same in each other except PRM)

Nakagaki, Miyo

Today
Before replacing the wrong cabling, today, we clean up the cable labels not to miss the cabling by arranging the common naming convention defined in JGW-D2011573-v8.
During this work, we found some typos in this document. So update it to version 9 now.

Next
Though we clean up almost labels, we did not do for some labels due to several things that I have to check before the modification. 

• IM1 and IM2 was not modified because I was not sure whether IM1 is IM-V or IM-H. 
• BI, BO cable from HPCD to IO chassis were unclear to understand the label due to messy cabling.
• PSD label was not prepared due to no description in the version 8.

• IM1 and IM2 was not modified because I was not sure whether IM1 is IM-V or IM-H.
• BI, BO cable from HPCD to IO chassis were unclear to understand the label due to messy cabling.
• PSD label was not prepared due to no description in the version 8.

After I fixed the wrong cable, the noise coupling at higher frequency of the BF-damper in PRM was reduced as shown in the attached first figure.
Coherence at the frequency is decreased after fixing the wrong cabling. (Python script that I used to plot is in '/users/Miyo/dropbox/LOG/210211/')

I also compared the TFs among other Type-Bp suspensions in the second attached figure. In this figure, I confirmed that all Type-Bp suspensions roughly have the same TF each other but there is a difference among PRM and the other suspensions due to wrong calibration in klog#6949. So, we should calibrate so that the PRM have same TFs like other PR suspensions.
 

Glitches in PRM are like in klog ??