Differences between revisions 3 and 4
Revision 3 as of 2021-10-15 13:55:34
Size: 3112
Comment:
Revision 4 as of 2021-10-15 13:55:57
Size: 3095
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 62: Line 62:
=== Type-Bp ===

Agenda/Minutes

Zoom Meeting


CRY+VIS Interface Meeting

Date: 2021/10/15 13:00-13:25

Participants: Takahashi, Hirata, Miyoki, Yasui, Ikeda, Ushiba, Uchiyama, Yokozawa, Sato, Node

Post O3 Upgrade portal

Schedule

  • IX: Health check. F0 behavire.
  • EX: Health check.
  • IY: (LVDT driver. Cable check.)
  • EY: H4 geophone. F0 FR. Height adjustment. LVDT driver. IP position. Insulator repair.

Status

  • TM height setting: ITMY
  • Commissioning in air: Health check.
  • Commissioning in vacuum:
  • Overall commissioning:
  • Acceptance check:
  • PF actuator: At the in-vacuum commissioning.
  • New vacuum pumps for V-chambers: Under the bidding process.
  • Heater control: To PRs in the next.

Discussion


VIS Meeting

Date: 2021/10/15 14:00-

Participants:

Summary Report

Type-A

Type-B

  • BS: We tested the robustness of the outer frame
    • Resolution of the dial gauge: 0.01 mm.
    • Weight added to the frame: ~71 kg.
    • Corner (-X,-Y) : -3 um

    • Corner (-X,+Y): -10um

    • Corner (+X,+Y): it didn't seem to move much.

    • Corner (+X,-Y): -8 um

  • SR2: The geophone theoretical noise was calculated (shown in this meeting last year also). The noise is higher than expected.

  • SR3: The geophone theoretical noise was calculated.
    • Below 500 mHz, the calculated and measured values seem to coincide.

    • As far as I remember being told, these geophones have been very noisy after installation on the IP table. I need to measure the IP free swing displacement ASD on a day with low micro-seismic in order to compare.

Type-Bp

  • SR2: We fixed the BF picomotor cable.
  • PR3:
    • On monday we moved the V1 OSEM within range. We left it at ~9940 cnt. Although I don't expect this to happen, let's see if the OSEM remains in range after the next eathquake.
    • We assesed whether is possible to lower the SF keystone by 5.2 mm: it seems possible.
      • The concern was cables underneath the BF touching the security structure ring, but there are functional gaps after we lowered it.
      • First we moved the keystone using the lock screws, but later we used 405 grams.
      • Lowering the SF yoke-coil assembly might damage cables around, but I guess we can fix them if such a thing happens.
      • It's better to add mass on the keystone rather than on the BF. Hirata-san has designed an adapter.

Type-C

Electronics

Control

Schedule

See Schedule

  • Type-A team:
  • Type-B team:

Safety

Discussion

Travel Plans

(Date in Kamioka)

The week from 10/18

  • Hirata: 10/18-22
  • Yano: 10/18-22

The week from 10/25

  • Takahashi: 10/26-29
  • Sato: 10/26-29
  • Hirata: 10/26-29
  • Yano: 10/25-29

Next meeting

  • 2021/10/22(FRI)

KAGRA/Subgroups/VIS/VISMinutes20211015 (last edited 2021-10-15 14:57:17 by RyutaroTakahashi)