Differences between revisions 7 and 29 (spanning 22 versions)
Revision 7 as of 2021-04-14 08:06:02
Size: 5428
Editor: KousekiMiyo
Comment:
Revision 29 as of 2021-04-17 08:22:28
Size: 10237
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 8: Line 8:
Date : 13:30- Date : 13:30-14:15
Line 10: Line 10:
Participants : Participants : Takahashi, Kimura, Ikeda, Uchiyama, Hirata, Sato, Aso, Ushiba, Miyoki, Miyo
Line 15: Line 15:
 * IX: Oplev will be finalized in April. Height and alignment adjustments are on going. ACC will be installed in April.
  * Investigation of the behavior of BF.
  * Wide range FR for the F0.
  * Adjustment of the height of pre-isolator using the piston.
 * IY: Remedy of the pre-isolator is scheduled in April.
 * EX: Oplev setting is on going.
 * IX: Oplev will be finalized in April. Alignment adjustment is scheduled on 4/20. ACC will be installed in April.
  * Height adjustment ([[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16487|summary]]).
 * IY: Remedy of the pre-isolator will be postponed.
 * EX: Height and alignment adjustments are scheduled in 4/21-22.
Line 27: Line 25:
 * Acceptance check: Check items for in-air commissioning should be confirmed on the payload.  * Acceptance check: Meeting was set every Friday to decide the acceptance check items.
Line 30: Line 28:
 * Overall commissioning:
 * Procedure of TM height setting: Prepare for the measurement in the first in-vacuum commissioning in IX.
 * Overall commissioning: Schedule meeting will be held on 4/19.
 * Procedure of TM height setting: Prepare the adjustable range tables.
Line 36: Line 34:
14:30- 14:15-15:30
Line 38: Line 36:
Participants: Participants: Takahashi, Fabian, Hirata, Ishizaki, Miyo, Sato, Miyoki, Washimi, Terrence, Aso, Tanaka
Line 43: Line 41:
 * Type-A team: IXV 4/13-16
 * Type-B team: PR2 4/13-16
 * Type-A team: IXV 4/20, EXV 4/21-22
 * Type-B team: Remaining work on Type-B/Bp.
Line 64: Line 62:
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16447|16447]] Support for common Tower/Payload model files: Type-B(BS) supports TOWER_MASTER and PAYLOAD_MASTER. , __satoru.ikeda__
* [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16447|16447]] Support for common Tower/Payload model files Type-B(BS) supports TOWER_MASTER and PAYLOAD_MASTER. , __satoru.ikeda__
Line 67: Line 66:
Line 69: Line 69:
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16465|16465]] Laser level deviation from the horizontal. , __fabian.arellano__
  * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16466|16466]] Comment , __tomotada.akutsu__
Line 70: Line 73:
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16365|16365]] Wiring the release sensor (outside the vacuum chamber) , __naohisa.satou__
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16438|16438]] Comment , __naohisa.satou__
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16421|16421]] Height adjustment of ITMX , __ryutaro.takahashi__
 * (!) [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16458|16458]] Comment , __ryutaro.takahashi__

 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16468|16468]] Tuning of LVDT type accelerometer for ITMX , __kouseki.miyo__
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16365|16365]] Wiring the release sensor (outside the vacuum chamber) , __naohisa.satou__
  * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16438|16438]] Comment , __naohisa.satou__
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16421|16421]] Height adjustment of ITMX , __ryutaro.takahashi__
  * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16458|16458]] Comment , __ryutaro.takahashi__
  * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16472|16472]] Comment , __ryutaro.takahashi__
  * (!) [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16480|16480]] Comment , __satoru.ikeda__
  * (!) [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16487|16487]] Comment , __ryutaro.takahashi__

'''MCF'''

 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16463|16463]] Taking picture of MCo coils , __takaaki.yokozawa__
Line 75: Line 88:
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16417|16417]] Tightening of the inner wire locating clamps. , __fabian.arellano__   * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16440|16440]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__
 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16444|16444]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__
 * (!) [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16460|16460]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__

* [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16417|16417]] Tightening of the inner wire locating clamps. , __fabian.arellano__
 
* [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16440|16440]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__
  * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16444|16444]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__
  * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16460|16460]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__
  * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16469|16469]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__
 
* (!) [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16484|16484]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__

'''PR3'''

 * [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16348|16348]] Tightening the locating clamps for the piano wire. , __fabian.arellano__
  * (!) [[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16486|16486]] Comment , __fabian.arellano__
Line 82: Line 103:

Line 86: Line 105:
 * Height adjustment of ITMX ([[http://klog.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/osl/?r=16487|summary]]).
 * Investigation of the stepper motor driver.
 * Tuning of the ACCs.
Line 87: Line 110:
=== Type-Bp PR2 ===
This week we inspected and tightened the wires clapms in PR2. We followed the same procedure as in PR3, so I won't write any details here.
=== Type-Bp ===
 * I checked how large the buoyancy effect is in PR suspensions.
  * See klog.
  * Some values look very big. I guess this is due to LVDT card replacemet without the adjustment of resistors.
 * We checked the accuracy of two laser levels.One of them was very bad and discarded. The other one was very good.
 * Miyoki-san has bought another laser level already.
Line 90: Line 117:
 * We removed the IRM side panels and measure the gaps in different places using thickness gauges:
  * Largest gap: 220 um close the wire, but smaller exactly where the wire is.
  * Smallest gap: (50 , 60 ) um.
 * We tightened the clamps according to the specification: 10 Nm for the weight holding ones and 2 Nm for the locating ones.
  * 10 out of 12 screws rotated by small amounts when tightened, however,
  * The two screws of the locating clamp at the +Y side were completely loose.
 * After we re-assembled and released the payload we realized it had a lot of negative pitch (I wrote positive in the klog, sorry) and at least one OSEM flag was touching.
  * We corrected the pitch with the picomotor.
  * We also moved the BF keystone close to nominal position with the fishing rod.
  * Then we corrected IM yaw.
 * We found picomotor cables and stepper motor cables disconnected, so we connected them.
 * By the end of today's work the IM seemed to be hanging free.
 * We tried to measure TFs, but it seems the actuation is not going through because of a problem in the real-time model. Miyo-kun and Ikeda-san will take a look.
==== PR3 ====
 * Using the good laser level and the picomotor we set the pitch of the mirror to -3.3 mrad (Thursday).
 * We moved the BF keystone close to the setpoint.
 * We released the SF and closed the vacuum chamber.
 * The vertical OSEMs were either out of range or close to the end of their ranges. We moved them into range.
 * We measured a few IM transfer functions. The system looks healthy.
 * Just to check reproducibility, we measured the pitch again and got the expected value of -3.3 mrad (Friday).

==== PR2 ====
 * We tested the pitch stability with the Trunp method. We did three rounds and the changes were
  * 398 µrad,
  * -398 µrad
  * -663 µrad.
 * Then we checked the mirror pitch with respect to the horizontal; we measured '''11 mrad'''. We thought it was too much so we decided to check the accuracy of the laser level.
 * We repeated the measurement with the good laser level and got '''5 mrad''', which was more resonable. Using the picomotor we moved it to '''3.3 mrad'''.
 * We released the SF and closed the chamber.
 * Transfer function measurements showed the system was healthy.
 * Although ther suspension was already hanging free, we checked the position of the vertical OSEMs just to make sure the flags were not close to touching. We decided to move V2 and V3 panels.
 * '''When we finished we measured the pitch again with the good laser level and didn't get 3.3 mrad, 1.2 mrad! We don't know what could have changed.<<BR>> '''
 * '''We remember another instance in which the pitch changed unexpectedly (after the tightening of the clamps). We need to keep watching it.'''

==== Remaining work ====
 * Replacement of a broken LVDT driver (PRM?)
 * Set the mirrors to nominal height.
  * Terada-san's height marks seem gone.
   * PR2 doesn't have one.
   * We found one in PR3 chamber which may be Terada-san's one, but there's no indication.
   * We haven't checked PR3 chamber yet.
  * We must take into account that some LVDT drivers were replaced and the LVDTs were not recalibrated.
  * A possible procedure would be something like this:
   * Set the SF in nominal height per 3D-CAD.
   * Set the laser level at the nominal mirror height.
   * Move the BF keystone until the mirror is at the nominal height.
   * Take a note of the setpoints and modify medm screens.
   * Move vertical OSEMs if necessary.
 * Before pump down set the keystones to heights according to the buoyancy corrections.
 * Fishing rods in PR2 and PR3 seem to be working fine.
Line 105: Line 156:

 * Before pumping down the IMC area, we have to write acceptance document for review. This document will be organized by Akutsu-san with some VIS people (Miyo, Takahashi)
 * We are characterizing the OpLev of IMC suspensions. Power of the SLD, beam profile, wave length, and calibration of the OpLev.
Line 113: Line 163:
Suspension commissioning details and plans? [Terrence]

 * Has it been discussed? To me, it is still very unclear how it should be done and what people expect. If it has been discussed before, it seems to me it is not transparent.
 * I would like to call for a meeting. In the meeting, we should discuss how should SC be done, including but not limited to topics like:
  * The scope of the suspension commissioning.
  * What are some deliverables?
  * How should tasks be done? (E.g. Sensor alignment, noise estimation, etc..)
  * What methods should we use? (I propose to use a benchmark so we accept multiple methods, for now.)
  * What are some evaluations that should be done? (E.g. We should make a report for each suspension about what has been done and what are some objective quantities that we measured to confirm the performance of the suspensions)
  * How to interface with interferometer commissioning? (We shouldn't think of suspension commissioning as something that can be done once and for all. Instead, we need to get input from the interferometer and recursively update our strategies.)
  * Someone should roughly plan out the timeline (at least from start to finish).
 * I will be drafting a document, which I hope to serve as a handbook/rules for suspension commissioning so everything is clear to everyone.
  * I found Miyo-san's suspension comissioning document [[https://gwdoc.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/cgi-bin/private/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=12444|JGW-E2112444-v2]]. But there are many more things that I would like to address and discuss in detail, for example, how exactly should we do sensor diagonalization? How should we measure performance?
 * Which mailing list should I use, to organize the meetings? gokagra?
Line 114: Line 179:
The week from 4/12

 * Takahashi: 4/12-16
 * Sato: 4/12-16
 * Hirata: 4/12-16
Line 126: Line 185:
The week from 4/26

 * Takahashi: 4/26-28
 * Sato: 4/26-5/1
 * Hirata: 4/26-28
Line 127: Line 192:
 * 2021/4/16(FRI)  * 2021/4/23(FRI)

Agenda/Minutes

Zoom Meeting


CRY+VIS Interface Meeting

Date : 13:30-14:15

Participants : Takahashi, Kimura, Ikeda, Uchiyama, Hirata, Sato, Aso, Ushiba, Miyoki, Miyo

Post O3 Upgrade portal

Schedule

  • IX: Oplev will be finalized in April. Alignment adjustment is scheduled on 4/20. ACC will be installed in April.
  • IY: Remedy of the pre-isolator will be postponed.
  • EX: Height and alignment adjustments are scheduled in 4/21-22.
  • EY: Installation of the tower will be restarted in May. Removing of the maraging rod is necessary.

Status

  • Corrugate tube fixing jig: They will be prepared by the end of May.
  • Commissioning in air: From mid. May for IX.
  • Commissioning in vacuum:
  • Acceptance check: Meeting was set every Friday to decide the acceptance check items.
  • PF actuator: After the commissioning for suspension.
  • Jig for FC painting:
  • Overall commissioning: Schedule meeting will be held on 4/19.
  • Procedure of TM height setting: Prepare the adjustable range tables.

Discussion


VIS Meeting

14:15-15:30

Participants: Takahashi, Fabian, Hirata, Ishizaki, Miyo, Sato, Miyoki, Washimi, Terrence, Aso, Tanaka

Schedule

See Schedule

  • Type-A team: IXV 4/20, EXV 4/21-22
  • Type-B team: Remaining work on Type-B/Bp.

Milestone

  • IMC suspensions are ready in air [40] will finish 2011/04/21.

  • PRs are ready in air [643] will finish 2011/07/09.

  • ETMX is ready in air [656] will finish 2021/08/25.

  • ITMX is ready in air [657] will finish 2021/08/31.

  • ETMY is ready in air [658] will finish 2021/09/16.

  • ITMY is ready in air [659] will finish 2021/11/08.

  • BS is ready in air [691] will finish 2011/11/24.

  • SRs are ready in air [663] will finish 2011/12/20.

  • Output suspensions are ready in air [695] will finish 2011/12/21.

  • TMSY is ready in air [708] will finish 2011/??/??.

  • TMSX is ready in air [684] will finish 2011/??/??.

2021/03/29 updated

Klog

BS

  • 16447 Support for common Tower/Payload model files Type-B(BS) supports TOWER_MASTER and PAYLOAD_MASTER. , satoru.ikeda

General

  • 16446 Model files have been modified. , satoru.ikeda

  • 16445 Buoyancy effect in PR suspensions. , fabian.arellano

  • 16465 Laser level deviation from the horizontal. , fabian.arellano

    • 16466 Comment , tomotada.akutsu

IX

  • 16468 Tuning of LVDT type accelerometer for ITMX , kouseki.miyo

  • 16365 Wiring the release sensor (outside the vacuum chamber) , naohisa.satou

    • 16438 Comment , naohisa.satou

  • 16421 Height adjustment of ITMX , ryutaro.takahashi

    • 16458 Comment , ryutaro.takahashi

    • 16472 Comment , ryutaro.takahashi

    • (!) 16480 Comment , satoru.ikeda

    • (!) 16487 Comment , ryutaro.takahashi

MCF

  • 16463 Taking picture of MCo coils , takaaki.yokozawa

PR2

  • 16417 Tightening of the inner wire locating clamps. , fabian.arellano

    • 16440 Comment , fabian.arellano

    • 16444 Comment , fabian.arellano

    • 16460 Comment , fabian.arellano

    • 16469 Comment , fabian.arellano

    • (!) 16484 Comment , fabian.arellano

PR3

  • 16348 Tightening the locating clamps for the piano wire. , fabian.arellano

    • (!) 16486 Comment , fabian.arellano

This is generated by python script in /users/Miyo/dropbox/Script/scrapping/main.py.

Summary Report

TypeA

  • Height adjustment of ITMX (summary).

  • Investigation of the stepper motor driver.
  • Tuning of the ACCs.

TypeB

Type-Bp

  • I checked how large the buoyancy effect is in PR suspensions.
    • See klog.
    • Some values look very big. I guess this is due to LVDT card replacemet without the adjustment of resistors.
  • We checked the accuracy of two laser levels.One of them was very bad and discarded. The other one was very good.
  • Miyoki-san has bought another laser level already.

PR3

  • Using the good laser level and the picomotor we set the pitch of the mirror to -3.3 mrad (Thursday).
  • We moved the BF keystone close to the setpoint.
  • We released the SF and closed the vacuum chamber.
  • The vertical OSEMs were either out of range or close to the end of their ranges. We moved them into range.
  • We measured a few IM transfer functions. The system looks healthy.
  • Just to check reproducibility, we measured the pitch again and got the expected value of -3.3 mrad (Friday).

PR2

  • We tested the pitch stability with the Trunp method. We did three rounds and the changes were
    • 398 µrad,
    • -398 µrad
    • -663 µrad.
  • Then we checked the mirror pitch with respect to the horizontal; we measured 11 mrad. We thought it was too much so we decided to check the accuracy of the laser level.

  • We repeated the measurement with the good laser level and got 5 mrad, which was more resonable. Using the picomotor we moved it to 3.3 mrad.

  • We released the SF and closed the chamber.
  • Transfer function measurements showed the system was healthy.
  • Although ther suspension was already hanging free, we checked the position of the vertical OSEMs just to make sure the flags were not close to touching. We decided to move V2 and V3 panels.
  • When we finished we measured the pitch again with the good laser level and didn't get 3.3 mrad, 1.2 mrad! We don't know what could have changed.

  • We remember another instance in which the pitch changed unexpectedly (after the tightening of the clamps). We need to keep watching it.

Remaining work

  • Replacement of a broken LVDT driver (PRM?)
  • Set the mirrors to nominal height.
    • Terada-san's height marks seem gone.
      • PR2 doesn't have one.
      • We found one in PR3 chamber which may be Terada-san's one, but there's no indication.
      • We haven't checked PR3 chamber yet.
    • We must take into account that some LVDT drivers were replaced and the LVDTs were not recalibrated.
    • A possible procedure would be something like this:
      • Set the SF in nominal height per 3D-CAD.
      • Set the laser level at the nominal mirror height.
      • Move the BF keystone until the mirror is at the nominal height.
      • Take a note of the setpoints and modify medm screens.
      • Move vertical OSEMs if necessary.
  • Before pump down set the keystones to heights according to the buoyancy corrections.
  • Fishing rods in PR2 and PR3 seem to be working fine.

TypeC

  • We are characterizing the OpLev of IMC suspensions. Power of the SLD, beam profile, wave length, and calibration of the OpLev.

Electronics

Control

Safety

Discussion

Suspension commissioning details and plans? [Terrence]

  • Has it been discussed? To me, it is still very unclear how it should be done and what people expect. If it has been discussed before, it seems to me it is not transparent.
  • I would like to call for a meeting. In the meeting, we should discuss how should SC be done, including but not limited to topics like:
    • The scope of the suspension commissioning.
    • What are some deliverables?
    • How should tasks be done? (E.g. Sensor alignment, noise estimation, etc..)
    • What methods should we use? (I propose to use a benchmark so we accept multiple methods, for now.)
    • What are some evaluations that should be done? (E.g. We should make a report for each suspension about what has been done and what are some objective quantities that we measured to confirm the performance of the suspensions)
    • How to interface with interferometer commissioning? (We shouldn't think of suspension commissioning as something that can be done once and for all. Instead, we need to get input from the interferometer and recursively update our strategies.)
    • Someone should roughly plan out the timeline (at least from start to finish).
  • I will be drafting a document, which I hope to serve as a handbook/rules for suspension commissioning so everything is clear to everyone.
    • I found Miyo-san's suspension comissioning document JGW-E2112444-v2. But there are many more things that I would like to address and discuss in detail, for example, how exactly should we do sensor diagonalization? How should we measure performance?

  • Which mailing list should I use, to organize the meetings? gokagra?

Travel Plans

The week from 4/19

  • Takahashi: 4/19-23
  • Sato: 4/19-23
  • Hirata: 4/19-23

The week from 4/26

  • Takahashi: 4/26-28
  • Sato: 4/26-5/1
  • Hirata: 4/26-28

Next meeting

  • 2021/4/23(FRI)

KAGRA/Subgroups/VIS/VISMinutes20210416 (last edited 2021-04-17 08:22:28 by RyutaroTakahashi)