Operators: YamaK, Yokozawa
Shift time: 2025-08-09 09:00-17:00 JST
Summary of notification :
klog34804 : We need to check the ALS PNC X
Duty cycle is not so glld due to several earthquake
Check Items:
VAC: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
CRY cooler: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
Temp: [10:00] No issues were found [16:00] No issues were found.
Compressor: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
GAS: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found. (But still ITMY BF was close to -20,000)
IFO state (JST):
10:28 lock loss
failed to handover 3times
0.42 Hz detected in the GRX
11:10 ovserving
11:29 lock loss
12:43 observing (one earthquake happened, so I didn’t contact to IFO expert)
13:03 lock loss
13:29 observing
14:02 lock loss
Several earthquake happened, so waiting for a while
15:51 Observing
16:04 lock loss
17:00 Finish the shift
After the several check, I found when the ALS_PNCX on, it started as shown in Fig.1.
I don't know it affect to the handover, the probability of handover was lower in current a few days, I think.
I also checked when it started, by eye check of the ndscope, I found this issue from 5th Aug. as shown in Fig.2.
Operators: YamaT, Yokozawa
Shift time: 2025-08-09 09:00-17:00 JST
Summary of notification :
(Fig.1.) IYV booth ondotori output several glitches, we need to check both software and hardware
Check Items:
VAC: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
CRY cooler: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
Temp: [10:00] We found FIELD_IYA changed 0.5 deg. But, there are daily oscillation, so we ignored the 0.5 deg.change [16:00] (Fig.1.) IYV BOOTH had several spike like signal, we need to check ondotori itself or data acquisition system
Compressor: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
GAS: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found. (But still ITMY BF was close to -20,000)
IFO state (JST):
14:00 Locked loss
14:34 Observation
17:00 finish the shift
(Fig.1. this morning)
- Above 0.4 Hz, there are also coherence with IM P (and L?)
ground motion X -> Oplev -> TM L-> IM P path ?
- Around 0.4 Hz, there is resonant frequency
- Below 0.4 Hz, only TM L had coherence, so
ground motion X -> Oplev ?
(Fig.2. as a reference, I selected the relatively larger ground motion day 15th Jul. 06:53:00, about 3times larger than usual )
Compared from FIg.1. the coherence of the BF L,P became much higher and spectrum shape of TM L and TM P changed a lot below 0.4 Hz.
So, below 0.4 Hz, there are also possibility
ground motion X -> BF L,P (usually below the spectrum) -> TM L P -> oplev ?
Though all raw frames during the network disconnection were sent by the resend process, some automated process missed GWF files at processed time. LL frames during that period are still missing. Note that IFO was out of observing at that time. So there is no urgency to regenerate LL h(t).
Problematic periods were as follows.
- full: [1438571328, 1438572736)
- science: [1438571328, 1438572736)
- second: [1438570800, 1438572600)
- minute: None
- LL: [1438571359, 1438572778)
On the test instance (see also klog#34755), cache files was regenerated properly after the resend process. So I replaced ones in the product instance in which there are some lacks of delayed frames. It seems that replacing the product version of the cache generation code with a new code will not cause any problems.
We turned on the OBS INTENT around 18:04 JST after weekly calibration work.
I updated line tracking parameters (JGW-L2314962).
All detected changes are coming from the planned commissioning activities.
- Changes in foton Fig.1 are related to klog#34798 (k1calcs).
- Changes in guardian shown in Fig.2 are related to klog#34791
- Changes in SDF tables shown in Fig.3-4 are related to klog#34797 (k1calcs) and klog#34795 (k1calex, k1caley).
- No changes in the model (Fig.5).
Finally, I raised CFC_LACTCH and IFO guardian moved from CALIB_NOT_READY to READY.
K1CALCS
Channels in JGW-L2314962
It's related to klog#34799
They were updated based on the latest value of optical gain of DARM and ETMX actuator efficiencies in klog#34798.
Changes were accepted on observation.snap (Fig.1), down.snap (Fig.2), and safe.snap (Fig.3).
Finally, numerical rounding errors were reverted after re-loading observation.snap as shown in Fig.4.
We did the calibration measurements and updated the parameters.
Previous values are listed in klog#34777.
Estimated parameters in the previous measurements are as follows.
 H_etmxtm = 3.855511943e-14 @10Hz ( 0.65% from previous measurements)
 H_etmxim = 1.489006529e-14 @10Hz ( 0.31% from previous measurements)
 Optical_gain = 1.935046702e+12  ( -1.35% from previous measurements)
 Cavity_pole = 18.118449097 Hz ( -0.09% from previous measurements)
Fig.1 show the fitting results.
Fig.2 show the ratio of the sensing functions
I updated line tracking parameters (JGW-L2314962).
All detected changes are coming from the planned commissioning activities.
- Changes in foton Fig.1 are related to klog#34798 (k1calcs).
- Changes in guardian shown in Fig.2 are related to klog#34791
- Changes in SDF tables shown in Fig.3-4 are related to klog#34797 (k1calcs) and klog#34795 (k1calex, k1caley).
- No changes in the model (Fig.5).
Finally, I raised CFC_LACTCH and IFO guardian moved from CALIB_NOT_READY to READY.
Operation shift summary: Aug. 8th
Operators: Oshino, Washimi
Shift time: 2025-08-08 09:00-17:00 JST
Check Items:
VAC: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
CRY cooler: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
Temp: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
Compressor: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
GAS: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] IYA_FIELD : -0.3 degC
IFO state (JST):
9:00 CAL and TCam work
10:00 DGS maintenance is ongoing
11:00 Ushiba-san requested the Observation state (Not "Observation flag")
11:10 Locked
11:26 DanChen offloaded the EX IP
12:53 Locked (READY state), 4.9Mpc
15:00 Lock loss
15:50 Locked (~5Mpc), CAL work start
We checked the status of the BS seismometer.
Motivation ; klog34743, there are strong coherence between "only" BS x direction and PR2, PR3 and PRM oplevs, especially PR2 oplev.
If the seismometer worked well, there are several path from ground motion of X direction and oplev sensor and/or PR mirrors. (maybe oplev sensors)
To confirm it, we checked the status of the BS seismometer.
1. Eye check of the BS seismometer (Fig.1.)
I and Tomaru-san checked the eye check of BS seismometer, and we confirmed that the tilt sensing and cabling were no problem.
2. Put the portable seismometer near the BS seismometer (same direction) Fig.2.
Fig.2. was several complex, but I would like to explain it.
Left upper : there are spectrum which can compare the x,y,z direction of the BS(red), IXV(blue) and portable(green) one. Coherence between BS and IXV(blue) and portable(green). direction dependence (x(red), y(blue) and z(green)) of spectrum for one seismomerter.
As you can see, there are strong coherence if the same direction. (And I confirmed there are almost no coherence in different direction)
Right upper : 9 coherence between PR2(red),PR3(blue),PRM(green) L and P and Y vs BS seismometer X, Y and Z
As you can see, PR2,3,M L oplev and BS seismometer X has strong coherence in 0.1 - 1 Hz, especially PR2, several coherence in case of the PR2 P and Y
And smaller coherence beween PR oplevs and BS seismometer Y,Z
Left lower : 9 coherence between PR2(red),PR3(blue),PRM(green) L and P and Y vs IXV seismometer X, Y and Z
As you can see, the shape of the coherence between BS and IXV is very similar, so the ground motion is common in the center area.
Right lower : As as reference, we put the coherence for the portable seismometer which placed today. As you can see, the shape of the coherence is very similar with BS as expected, so output of the BS seismometer can be believable.
3. Put the portable seismometer near the BS seismometer (45 degree rotation) Fig.3.
I put the portable seismometer with rotating the tilt axis.
Compare with BS seismometer, the coherence was quite smaller than others.
So, the "ground motion of only X direction affect to the oplev sensor or PR mirrors, maybe PR oplev sensors, especially PR2 oplev"
4. Revert the SDF (Fig.4.)
After this work, I cleaned up the portable siesmometer and I changed the several SDFs for this measurements, all SDF should be reverted.
(Fig.1. this morning)
- Above 0.4 Hz, there are also coherence with IM P (and L?)
ground motion X -> Oplev -> TM L-> IM P path ?
- Around 0.4 Hz, there is resonant frequency
- Below 0.4 Hz, only TM L had coherence, so
ground motion X -> Oplev ?
(Fig.2. as a reference, I selected the relatively larger ground motion day 15th Jul. 06:53:00, about 3times larger than usual )
Compared from FIg.1. the coherence of the BF L,P became much higher and spectrum shape of TM L and TM P changed a lot below 0.4 Hz.
So, below 0.4 Hz, there are also possibility
ground motion X -> BF L,P (usually below the spectrum) -> TM L P -> oplev ?
This update includes only ones of fundamental OS packages.
So there is no change in the functions of SummaryPages and other web tools themselves.
We accepted the SDFs reported on klog34794.
CALEX, CALEY
K1:CAL-PCAL_{EX,EY}_TCAM_{MAIN,PATH1,PATH2}_{X,Y}
A CAL Tcam session was performed to obtain beam position information necessary for Pcal. The parameters have already been updated, and SDF has alreadly been accepted.
Operator: Dan Chen
Update Time: 2025/08/08 14:28:40
| EPICS Key | Before [mm] | After [mm] | Δ (After - Before) [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EX_TCAM_PATH1_X | 1.09650 mm | 1.03752 mm | -0.05898 mm |
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EX_TCAM_PATH1_Y | 63.91376 mm | 63.65155 mm | -0.26221 mm |
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EX_TCAM_PATH2_X | 0.60969 mm | 0.51673 mm | -0.09296 mm |
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EX_TCAM_PATH2_Y | -67.05462 mm | -67.11092 mm | -0.05630 mm |
Update Time: 2025/08/08 14:29:34
| EPICS Key | Before [mm] | After [mm] | Δ (After - Before) [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EX_TCAM_MAIN_X | 3.80646 mm | 4.14543 mm | +0.33897 mm |
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EX_TCAM_MAIN_Y | 12.34284 mm | 12.29349 mm | -0.04934 mm |
Update Time: 2025/08/08 14:30:21
| EPICS Key | Before [mm] | After [mm] | Δ (After - Before) [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EY_TCAM_PATH1_X | 0.35370 mm | 0.18050 mm | -0.17320 mm |
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EY_TCAM_PATH1_Y | 63.96128 mm | 63.77287 mm | -0.18841 mm |
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EY_TCAM_PATH2_X | -1.00083 mm | -1.18102 mm | -0.18019 mm |
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EY_TCAM_PATH2_Y | -70.15549 mm | -70.09640 mm | +0.05909 mm |
Update Time: 2025/08/08 14:30:50
| EPICS Key | Before [mm] | After [mm] | Δ (After - Before) [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EY_TCAM_MAIN_X | 10.48623 mm | 9.47443 mm | -1.01181 mm |
| K1:CAL-PCAL_EY_TCAM_MAIN_Y | -3.93907 mm | -3.65031 mm | +0.28876 mm |
Date: 2025/8/8
I performed this work as a weekly work.
Attached figure is a screen-shot just after the work.
Abstract:
I modified LSC_LOCK guardian and OMC_LSC guardian to speed up OMC lock with sideband and TEM00.
I tested new guardian code several times and the modified guardian seems to work well.
Detail:
Recently, it sometimes takes a long to to lock OMC with sideband and carrier.
The reason is following.
1. Sideband power is sometimes lower than the threshould even if upper sideband is resonating to OMC.
2. Transmission power of carrier is sometimes lower than the threshould of OMC lock trigger.
3. Transmission power of carrier changes a lot in time and sometimes becomes lower than the threshould during the power check.
To avoid unnecessary retry of the scan, I modified the gurdian as follows.
LSC_LOCK guardian (LOCKING_OMC_FOR_IAL_WITH_RF state):
The reason why the sideband power at AS was reduced is reduction of sideband buildup inside the PRC, so I normalized threshould by POP90 signals.
In addition, IMC output power also scales sideband power, so I added normalization by IMC output.
Figure 1 shows the modified guardian script.
OMC_LSC guardian (FIND_RESONANCE_FOR_10W):
First, current threshould for OMC lock during OMC scan is 10mW, which is to high for finding TEM00 mode.
So, I reduced the value from 10 to 6 as shown in fig2.
For identifying locked TEM00 is carrier or not, we used the instantanuous value of OMC transmission.
In that case, the process sometimes fails due to the accidential drop of the OMC transmission.
So, I modified the guardian to check the maximum value of OMC trans for 5 seconds and compare it with the threshould.
In addition, carrier power at AS changes in time while the sideband power is relatively stable, so I also implemented the function to check the PV value of OMC transmission power.
Figure 3 and 4 show the guardian script after modification.
For this reason, a manual reload was required to update the image when only one screen image was shown.
In order to use them as a monitor page, a link for each screen image was changed from the direct link to a new page to show one screen image with periodical auto-reload.
I removed old second frames on the disk storage in the mine.
Removed segment is [1434000000, 1436000000).
I took the TCam photos for commissioning at 9:31 ~ 09:36 this morning. The previous work is klog34714. We don't need to update the reference positions.
We performed a Pcal Tcam session without parameter update.
This is because we did not plan to have a CAL measurement this morning.
We turned off OBS_INTENT around 9:14 JST.
The plots in
https://gwdet.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~controls/slowmonitor/Road41/
was not updated for several months due to the HTML style modification of the original page
http://www3.hrr.mlit.go.jp/road/rain84452105.html
So I have fixed it.
Operators: Oshino, Washimi
Shift time: 2025-08-07 09:00-17:00 JST
Check Items:
VAC: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
CRY cooler: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
Temp: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
Compressor: [10:00] No issues were found. [16:00] No issues were found.
GAS: [10:00] Contact with Takahashi-san. (IY BF = -20049) [16:00] No issues were found. (IY BF = -19800)
IFO state (JST):
9:00 Start calibration
16:00 OBS Intent flag on
16:49 Lockloss
17:00 Locking
K1CALCS
Channels in JGW-L2314962
Because we found some mistakes in calibration as reported in klog#34778, I re-calculated line tracking parameters.
Changes were accepted on observation.snap (Fig.1), down.snap (Fig.2), and safe.snap (Fig.3).
Finally, numerical rounding errors were reverted after re-loading observation.snap as shown in Fig.4.
I updated line tracking parameters (JGW-L2314962).
All detected changes are coming from the planned commissioning activities.
- Changes in foton shown in Fig.1 are related to klog#34777 (k1calcs), klog#34701, klog#34739 (k1asc1) and klog#34764 (k1visetmxlsc).
- Changes in guardian shown in Fig.2 are related to klog#34748 (ASC_LOCK.py, lsclib.py)
- Changes in SDF tables shown in Fig.3-6 are related to klog#34713 (k1calex, k1caley), klog#34719, klog#34732 (k1sdfmanage), klog#34751 (k1omc), klog#34769 (k1visbsp, k1visommt1, k1visetmxlsc), klog#34770 (k1asc1, k1visbsp, k1visommt1, k1visetmxlsc), and klog#34779 (k1calcs),
- No changes in the model (Fig.7).
-----
After accepting works above, we found filter parameters which had been forgotten to update.
So we updated the calibration filters again as shown in Fig.8-9.
And then, line tracking parameters were re-calculated which made updates in foton (Fig.10) and SDF tables (Fig.11-12).
Accepting/reverting SDF cycle will be reported in klog#34782
Finally, I raised CFC_LACTCH and IFO guardian moved from CALIB_NOT_READY to READY.
