Reports 1-1 of 1 Clear search Modify search
MIF (General)
hirotaka.yuzurihara - 17:16 Tuesday 03 June 2025 (34054) Print this report
lockloss investigation: 2025/06/02~06/03

[Sunil, Yuzurihara]
We performed the lockloss investigation for the recent lockloss from the OBSERVATION state of the LSC_LOCK guardian, between 2025-06-02 02:33:35.062500 UTC and 2025-06-03 00:07:31.062500 UTC. The previous lockloss investigation was posted in klog34025. During this period, there were 14 lockloss. Note that this number included the lockloss from the 'WORKING_WITH_OBSERVATION_WITHOUT_LINES', so some of the lockloss might be related to the commissioning work.

EXCITATION under OBSERVATION_WITHOUT_LINES

Even though the state of the LSC_LOCK guardian was the OBSERVATION_WITHOUT_LINES, the excitation was done during 5 lockloss. Please switch the state to WORKING_WITH_OBSERVATION*. We don't want to waste times for the unnecessary check.

  • 2025-06-02 04:38:37.562500 UTC
  • 2025-06-02 05:05:22.062500 UTC
  • 2025-06-02 05:59:09.187500 UTC
  • 2025-06-02 06:47:16.937500 UTC
  • 2025-06-02 08:15:36.312500 UTC
     

1~10Hz seismic motion made the IMC lockloss

For 3 lockloss, we saw the excess of the seismic motion with 1~10 Hz, which made the oscillation of the IMC length control and caused the IMC lockloss. The plots are listed in DAC wiki.

One new finding about one lockloss (2025-06-02 02:33:35.062500 UTC) is that the excess of the seismic motion continued over 2 minutes, as shown in Figure 1. This is quite longer than the typical time of the earthquake or the blasting and the shape is different. This might be different source. As a result of excess of the seismic motion, mirrors started to oscillate (Figure 2) and lockloss happened.
This is different from the blasting, because I didn't receive the announcement.

Images attached to this report
Comments to this report:
takahiro.yamamoto - 20:05 Tuesday 03 June 2025 (34055) Print this report

> Please switch the state to WORKING_WITH_OBSERVATION*. We don't want to waste times for the unnecessary check.
Sorry for inconvenience. CAL measurements are now intentionally done in OBSERVATION_WITHOUT_LINES instead of WORKING_WITH_OBSERVATION for the reliability of measurements. We may be able to avoid using OBSERVATION_WITHOUT_LINES if there is some DQ flag which ensures no activity except calibration measurement at the same time...

Search Help
×

Warning

×