Reports 1-1 of 1 Clear search Modify search
MIF (General)
Elenna Capote - 16:23 Thursday 09 November 2023 (27568) Print this report
Some Locking statistics

Today is a relatively quiet day for ground motion- no earthquakes and the microseismic motion has been mostly below the 50th percentile, according to the BLRMS screen in the control room. I took a deeper look at the locking patterns to see if I could see any change in locking success. From a purely subjective point of view, locking the IFO to the point of being able to do commissioning work is a time consuming process because there can be so many locklosses.

Here is some actual data from today:

Within a 2 hour and 10 minute period, there were 37 lock attempts. Commissioning work essentially begins once the IFO reaches the PRFPMI locked with 3F state (guardian state number 1200). At this point, the PRMI is moved to the 1 FSIG sensors (state 1205), and then the ASC WFS can start the engagement and testing. Out of those 37 lock attempts, only six lock attempts actually achieved guardian state 1200. Of those 6 PRFPMI lock successes, only five allowed commissioning work- one lock reached state 1200 and then immediately lost lock after.

Of those final five locks where commissioning took place, four of the locklosses were caused by commissioning work (testing new loop engagement strategies). One lockloss appears to have occurred independent of the ASC work- ASC was in a steady state at the time and there was no oscillation in ASC preceding the lockloss.

I think that it would be beneficial to spend some time investigating why the locking process is so slow and so fragile. Commissioning will cause locklosses, but based on this one period of investigation, that only accounts for 13% of the locklosses. It also doesn't seem like these locklosses can be explained by ground motion. The PNC for the X arm has been enabled for all of these lock attempts.

I have attached a plot of the LSC LOCK guardian state number, marking the period of time I chose to do this quick analysis. It might be worthwhile to note that a majority of these locklosses seem to occur around state 1005- Engage PRMI 3F. It will probably also help to set up some programs that can collect actual statistics of the locklosses, so bigger trends can be investigated.

Images attached to this report
Comments to this report:
Elenna Capote - 13:21 Friday 10 November 2023 (27579) Print this report

The IMC Trans laser power hasBeen higher than normal for the past few weeks. This likely explains the larger number of locklosses at the PRMI state. I think some check should be added to the LSC LOCK guardian that checks the IMC output power, and adjusts the power to the nominal 1.2 W, or refuses to move forward in the locking sequence when the power is too high. We don't understand why the IMC laser power has changed.

takaaki.yokozawa - 16:48 Friday 10 November 2023 (27585) Print this report
Ushiba-san and I found that the discrepancy between IMC trans power and PSL HWP count.
IMC trans power : K1:LAS-POW_IMC_DC_INMON
PSL HWP count : K1:SYS-WP_PSL_STEP_TOTAL_DEG
during the Finesse measurement in 1st Nov. (klog27452)

From this discrepancy, the offset of IMC power changed (And from my eye, offset change value is correspond to 1 degree of PSL HWP)

So, to solve this issue, we need more sleeping time after rotating the PSL HPW during finesse measurement.

Images attached to this comment
Search Help
×

Warning

×