Differences between revisions 25 and 32 (spanning 7 versions)
⇤ ← Revision 25 as of 2020-03-09 06:24:06 →
Size: 5457
Editor: TakaakiYokozawa
Comment:
← Revision 32 as of 2020-03-11 22:57:36 → ⇥
Size: 5856
Editor: TakaakiYokozawa
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 2: Line 2:

== Priority of task ==

 *
Line 70: Line 74:
  * We didn't get any information from those chambers   * We don't have any information from those chambers yet.
Line 95: Line 99:
 * Hammering test of the MCF-PSL tube
Line 96: Line 102:

 * Hammering test of the IXA and IYA chamber
  * Non black coating materials

 * Hammering test of the end station
  * EXC, EYC, EXA, EYA chambers
  * TMSX, TMSY chamber
Line 100: Line 113:
 * Vibration injection to OMC leg for optical table  * Vibration injection to OMC legs
Line 102: Line 115:
  * We confirmed that the vibration from OMC leg is under the sensitivity curve   * We confirmed that the vibration of the OMC leg is under the sensitivity curve
Line 135: Line 148:
 * Clean up on the optical table
Line 136: Line 151:

 * Turn off the some lights

 * Clean up the experimental area
  * Clean environment may make the clean experiment

Memo for Commissioning break (Mar. 2020)

Priority of task

- Hammering test

Task list (Done)

  • Hammering test of the OMC chamber (Done 22nd Feb.)

    • klog13105

    • There is excess in the sensitivity between 100 Hz to 400 Hz
    • Reported later, the main reason is the vibration to the OMC legs for the optical table inside the vacuum
  • Hammering test AS table (Done 22nd Feb.)

    • klog13105

    • Reported later, the main reason is the vibration to the OMC legs for the optical table inside the vacuum
  • Reflection light check (Done 22nd Feb.)

    • klog13105

    • Now we didn't use the AS PD signals for interferometer control
    • There was possibility that the reflection light from AS table make dirty scattering light
    • Shadowed between the OMC viewport and AS table, but we couldn't see the clear noise reduction
    • Also, when we added vibration to the OMC viewport, we couldn't detect the noise increasing.
  • Hammering test SRM chamber (Done 22nd Feb.)

    • klog13105

    • The SRM mirror is misaligned. So We need to investigate the scattering light from SRM mirror
    • In this test, we can see the excess above 100 Hz
    • After this test, we cannot lock the interferometer. So if we have a time, we want to check again.

Task list (Partially done)

  • Hammering test between PR2 and BS, PR2 side (Done 24th Feb.)

    • klog13138

    • PR2-BS duct give excess noise around 70-100 Hz
  • Hammering test between PR2 and BS, PR2 side (Done 24th Feb.)

    • klog13138

    • PR2-BS duct give excess noise around 70-100 Hz
  • Hammering test between BS and SR2, BS side (Done 24th Feb.)

    • klog13138

    • BS-SR2 duct give slight excess noise but not much
  • Hammering test between BS and SR2, SR2 side (Done 24th Feb.)

    • klog13138

    • BS-SR2 duct give slight excess noise but not much
  • Hammering test between SR2 and SR3, SR2 side (Done 24th Feb.)

    • klog13138

    • SR2-SR3 duct give broadband exces noise around 100-400 Hz
  • Hammering test between SR2 and SR3, SR3 side (Done 24th Feb.)

    • klog13138

    • SR2-SR3 duct give broadband exces noise around 100-400 Hz
  • Hammering test between SR3 and SRM, SR3 side (Done 24th Feb.)

Task list (todo ; must items)

  • Hammering test around BS chamber
    • Possible noise source 70-100Hz
    • Identification the noise path
      • From leg? From oplev? From duct?
    • Set accelerometer for feed-forward
  • Hammering test of the PR2, PR3, PRM, IMMT2 chamber
    • We don't have any information from those chambers yet.
  • Hammering test of the IMMT1 chamber
    • This chamber is including the ISS system
    • We performed the acoustic injection and identified the some noise peaks.
    • We placed the accelerometer on the leg of the IMMT1 chamber
    • Identification of the noise path
  • Hammering test of the MCF chamber
    • We performed the acoustic injection and identified the some noise peaks.
    • We placed the accelerometer on the leg of the IMMT1 chamber
    • Identification of the noise path
  • Hammering test of the cryochamber
  • Hammering test of the ducts
    • To check the scattered light effect, we want to perform the hammering test to the all ducts
    • We will ask Akutsu-san and Aso-san for the priority for following test
  • Hammering test of the optical tables
    • (Must) IMC REFL table, REFL table, POP table
    • (Should) POS table, TMSX table, TMSY table

    • (If possible) OpLev tables, PCal tables

  • Hammering test of the MCF-PSL tube

Task list (todo ; if possible)

  • Hammering test of the IXA and IYA chamber
    • Non black coating materials
  • Hammering test of the end station
    • EXC, EYC, EXA, EYA chambers
    • TMSX, TMSY chamber

- PEM injection

Task list (Done)

  • Vibration injection to OMC legs

    • klog13152

    • We confirmed that the vibration of the OMC leg is under the sensitivity curve
  • Acoustic injection to the PSL room(29th Feb.)
    • We couldn't find the any excess
  • Acoustic injection to REFL table(29th Feb., 5th Mar. 7th Mar.)

Task list (todo ; must items)

  • Vibration injection to legs of the chambers
    • After hammering test, we will investigate the environmental vibration may appear to the sensitivity or not
  • Acoustic injection to the POP table

Task list (todo ; if possible)

  • Acoustic injection to the cryochamber
  • Magnetic injection

- Other task by PEM(?)

Task list (done)

Task list (todo)

  • Check and remove the unused cables
  • Clean up on the optical table
  • Check and turn off the unnecessary instrument
  • Turn off the some lights
  • Clean up the experimental area
    • Clean environment may make the clean experiment

KAGRA/Subgroups/PEM/MAR2020 (last edited 2020-03-21 04:36:19 by TakaakiYokozawa)