[Luke, Tyler, Cynthia, Shane, Michael]

Summary of Cleaning Activities:

We began cleaning Room 1119 at 2:00 PM.

At 2:30 PM, we moved to Room 1129 and continued cleaning.

Cleaning tasks included wiping down dust-collecting surfaces and vacuuming the floors.

Once the labs were clean, we proceeded to the cleanroom. 

• Wiping down surfaces and soft walls
• Vacuuming, mopping the floor, and finishing with IPA wipes

Particle Count Measurements:

• Pre-cleaning (2:30 PM):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 973
    • 0.5 µm: 354
    • 1.0 µm: 132
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 486
    • 0.5 µm: 177
    • 1.0 µm: 0
• Post-cleaning (4:10 PM):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 619
    • 0.5 µm: 132
    • 1.0 µm: 0
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 397
    • 0.5 µm: 0
    • 1.0 µm: 0

[Luke, Liu]

Over the winter break I have been working on this desmos toy model of the Frosti. There are still a few rough spots but I belive that it is a good visual representation of a 2D slice of the frosti. 

Here is a quick update on some of the things I have been working on regarding my project. 

[Luke, Cece, Luis]

Particle Count Measurements:

• Pre-cleaning (12:15 PM):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 1325
    • 0.5 µm: 265
    • 1.0 µm: 0
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 618
    • 0.5 µm: 132
    • 1.0 µm: 44

• Started Cleaning (3:20 pm)
• Finished Cleaning (4:20 pm)

• Post-cleaning (4:35 PM):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 1106
    • 0.5 µm: 221
    • 1.0 µm: 0
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 530
    • 0.5 µm: 44
    • 1.0 µm: 0

[Luke, Luis]

The vacuum chamber is currently baking. 

We stepped up to 120°C by increments of 30°C starting at 60°C. We took about an hour break at 90°C to let the temperatures equilibrate.  

Current state as of 12:20:

The gate valve is open, the calibrated Argon leak is open, and the filament of the RGA is on.

The temperatures are as follows:

PID right barrel upper: 113°C,  RGA volume: 120°C

PID left barrel lower: 121°C, Lid: 114°C

The lower temperatures should climb as the whole system heats up. 

Over the last couple weeks I have been working on finding the optimal position of the ringheater's thermal profile. 

Today I would like to give an update of where I am at and my next steps.

Using the python COMSOL interface I have been able to run and save deformation data sweeping through a great deal of potential combinations of widths and positions.

I then calculated their zernike coefficients and using a very simple "quality" function (02 - (40)*10 - (4-4)*10), where 02 stands for the zernike mode of quadratic deformation, I was able to generate a heat map of comparing the "quality" verses the width and position used. 

Seen below are four plots. The first is simply the 02 coefficient of the decomposition followed by the negative of 40 and 4-4 then the "quality."

This 'quality' function was an arbitrary choice on my part. I believe that my next step would either be defining a more useful function or using finesse to model the actual effects of this surface deformation.

[Luke, Mary, Luis]

Particle Count Measurements:

• Pre-cleaning (8:40 am):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 441
    • 0.5 µm: 44
    • 1.0 µm: 0
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 353
    • 0.5 µm: 176
    • 1.0 µm: 44

• Started Cleaning (3:16 pm)
• Finished Cleaning (4:10 pm)

• Post-cleaning (4:15 pm):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 574
    • 0.5 µm: 265
    • 1.0 µm: 132
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 177
    • 0.5 µm: 44
    • 1.0 µm: 0

These are some plots:

The first shows the convergence of the 02 mode reducing the size of the mesh. The second shows the the numerical error of the zernike.

The first is found by sweeping a parameter that changes the size of the mesh. The HR surface was set to half a cm for all values.

The second by taking the inner product of a zernike mode with its self and calculating its deviation from pi for varying fineness of the mesh.

I have redone the width and location optimization with a 40kg test mass. This was to see where the nominal ring heater would fall in this optimization map see attached.

There are two concerns I have with this modeling:

1. I am using normalized power only imparting 1W, which may effect the single pass scattering used for optimization.
2. I am only looking at the surface deformation and I believe that looking at OPD may also be something that is important to consider. 

Note z_RH is measured from the HR surface and w_RH is the half width of the target plane

I have created two more plots. One on the transmitted power for a specific configuration. This was done by taking the product of the efficiency and the power released by surface area of the source plane for a configuration assuming it is at 300C. The second is a plot of how close the reflector is to the test mass I have included a contour line at 2mm the nominal proximity constraint. Both of these plots are generated for a 2cm wide target plane.

Somethings of note: Because the proximity requires no modeling and can be determined purely mathematically it is easy to re-generate this plot of other target widths. If you increase the target width the proximity contour moves upward and downwards if reduced.

Slides

I have changed some properties of the thermal model and am re-running the thermal sweeping

I have also been messing around with making a logo

[Luke, Mohak, Luis]

We were also able to remove the residue that has built up on the soft walls by donning a skinny bunny suit and with two wipes rubbing both sides of the soft walls at the same time. The wipes would get gummy very quickly and need to be replaced frequently.

Particle Count Measurements:

• Pre-cleaning (1:20 pm):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 3577
    • 0.5 µm: 1369
    • 1.0 µm: 485
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 1062
    • 0.5 µm: 442
    • 1.0 µm: 177

• Started Cleaning (3:00 pm)
• Finished Cleaning (4:00 pm)

• Post-cleaning (4:22 pm):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 3577
    • 0.5 µm: 618
    • 1.0 µm: 132
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 2031
    • 0.5 µm: 397
    • 1.0 µm: 132

Slides

I have re-run the optimization plots with the changes mentioned last week. 

I have added the heat maps of the HOM scattering from HR deformation and the HOM scattering due to the OPD difference as well as the curvature actuation of the surface. 

Slides

I have added some slides to my meeting updates. The updates include: my choice in position and width, some figures I have added to my write up, and what I think my immediate steps are to wrap up.

I have also made a new FROSTI model that conducts its raytracing in real time. Something that was severely lacking in the previous model.

[Luke, Luis, Tyler, Ma, Christina, Maple]

We started by cleaning outside of the cleanroom wiping down the cable channel and working our way down. We replaced the air filter in the HEPA filter with what seemed to be the last one in storage. We then vacuumed outside, before wiping down the inside of the cleanroom. We then vacuumed, mopped, and wiped down the floor inside the cleanroom.

We are ready for venting the vacuum chamber which is planned to take place 6/26/25 at 10am. 

Particle Count Measurements:

• Pre-cleaning (12:00 pm):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 2517
    • 0.5 µm: 662
    • 1.0 µm: 176
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 177
    • 0.5 µm: 44
    • 1.0 µm: 0

• Post-cleaning (1:45 pm):
  • Zone 3:
    • 0.3 µm: 619
    • 0.5 µm: 88
    • 1.0 µm: 0
  • Zone 4:
    • 0.3 µm: 177
    • 0.5 µm: 88
    • 1.0 µm: 0

We will be configuring the RGA line to remove the spherical cube from the system. Currently our plan for the new design is to connect a 4.5" to 2.75" Reducing Cross to the gate valve on the vacuum system. It will be orientated vertically with the turbo pump on top coming off the end will be a 90 deg elbow. On the bottom there will be a 4.5" to 2.75" Zero length reducer attached to that will be a Tee on one side the pressure sensor and the other the RGA. Connected to the elbow will be the calibrated leak. 

The only parts not readily available are the ZLR and the 2.75" gaskets

[ Luke, Cynthia, Michael, Xuesi, Anthony ]

Started work around 12:45

We vented the chamber first and once it reached atmospheric pressure we started taking apart the RGA line.

We removed the parts in this order: Calibrated leak, RGA, Pressure gauge, 2.75" Blank on Tee, 2.75" Tee, all 1.33" Blanks on the cube, 4.5" feed through port, and finally the cube. Everything went smoothly after every part was taken off we covered the ends in Aluminum foil to maintain cleanliness. 

We then started the assembly of the new line. The parts were added in this order: Reducing cross, ZLR, Tee, Cal leak, RGA, 90 deg Elbow, and Pressure sensor.

We left off the Turbo pump as of now because we weren't able to find a 1" post not in use and we didn't want to put too much weight on the cross. We also noticed that the RGA might not fit on its probes because of a slight tilt to the cross and by extension the Tee. If this ends up being a problem we might need to remove all the parts connected to the cross so that we can reposition it so that the 2.75" rotating flange is connected to the gate valve.

Ended work around 4:00

[ Luke, Jon ]

Started work at 11:00

As mentioned in my previous post the RGA was not clearing the table because of a tilt in the cross. So I removed the 90 deg elbow, loosened the bolt securing the Tee to the ZLR, and removed the cross from the gate valve. I then spun around the Tee on the bottom so that the cal leak would be pointing in the right direction and connected the rotating 2.75" flange of the cross to the gate valve. I then added the small turbo pump to the top of the cross. 

Then with the help of Dr. Richardson, we made some adjustments to how the Tee was oriented with respect to the cross and how the cross was with respect to the table. So that the cal leak and RGA would fit on the table. After that we made some changes to the bolting of the ZLR to reducing cross replacing the 2.00" bolts and nuts with 1.75" bolts and nut plates. We did face some difficulty with half of the 2.00" bolts which required a bit of torque to get them out. 

Finished work at 2:20 

Things to do:

Before we start pumping down the system again Dr. Richardson wanted two other changes to be made. To replace the 2.75" to 1.33" conical reducer with a zero length reducer. He also wants the bolts that hold the main turbo pump to be replaced with nut plates. 

I plan on starting this work on Friday (7/12) before pumping down over the weekend

After the feedback from last meeting and Liu's help narrowing down what I should do to improve the model. I made some changes: First with Liu's help I made the proportions of the test mass and ring heater much more reasonable and parametrized by constants. Second from Cao's paper "FROSTI Nonimaging Reflector Design" Liu showed me what I should do to define the elliptical mirrors. Third during Friday's modeling/programming meeting walked me through getting the different irradiance plots to work. 

Today, I borrowed a bolt extractor drill bit from the machine shop to remove some stuck bolts from the zlr. Before starting, I laid down a sheet of aluminum foil on the work table and wiped down all the tools I was going to use. I began by drilling a small pilot hole and then enlarged it with a 5/32 drill bit. However, when I attempted to use the bolt extractor, it didn't grip the bolt effectively. Our bolts were too seized, causing the extractor bit to repeatedly slip instead of gaining traction.

[Luke, Luis, Jon, Tyler]

On the 22nd Dr. Richardson showed Luis, Tyler and I how to preform a leak test with the RGA. We did the initiall test and found a few leaks two were particuarly bad highlighted in orenge below. To try and remidy this we planned on replacing the copper gaskests on the leaking flanges. We then began taking the two problem flanges off, but seven of the eight bolts holding on the turbo pump were over tightened and had seized. So after we got them off we postponed the rest of the work to the next day.

On the 23nd Luis and I reattached the badly leaking flanges with new copper gaskets. We then preformed the Helium leak test with the RGA. As seen in the table below we weren't able to majorly changed the leaks in the two flanges.

[Luke, Tyler]

On the 27th Tyler and I ran the RGA leak test again with the electron multiplier on. These were the leaks we measured. The chamber's overall pressure was at ~6e-8 torr. 

[Luke, Luis, Cinthia, Michal, Tyler]

On the 26th Cinthia, Michal, and I took off the insolation on the vacuum chamber and re-routed it to include the new RGA volume. 

The next day Luis and I finished up the last of the flanges to be attached. We attached the Pirani gauge with a conical reducing nipple to the 2.75" port on the vacuum chamber. We then preformed the Helium leak testing, both flanges were quite low the 2.75" flange had a leak of 1.68e-10 torr and the 1.33" flange of 5.5e-12 torr. The leak on the 1.33" flange was so low it was difficult to know how much of it was real and how much was just noise.

[Luke, Tyler, Jon]

On the 3rd we set up the pid controllers for the heater tapes and after putting on the insulation we started heating them up. We first brought it to ~50C and let it stabilize, there was about a 6-7 degree difference between the RGA and the barrel temperature, with the barrel being higher. We then brought it to 60 then 70C it still maintained the slight difference between the RGA and barrel temperatures.

Here is a table of the temperatures of the flanges connected to electronics as I left it.

Notes: I removed the electronics from the pressure gauge (main volume) because while it was below the required threshold it was still quite high compared to the other flanges.

I measured the temperature of the flanges and reconnected the RGA turning on its filament. I then turned off the PID controllers.

Here is a table that has the temperature of the different parts of the vacuum chamber.

Ringheater Update

If the link does not work here is the file.

The vacuum chamber has stopped bakeing. 

Current state as of 12:10, 11/30/2024:

The gate valve is open, and the filament of the RGA is on.

The temperatures were steady at:

PID right: barrel upper: 128°C,  RGA volume: 125°C

PID left: barrel lower: 125°C, Lid: 113°C

The RGA flange was 38°C

Cleanroom was 26°C

The vacuum chamber has stopped baking. 

Current state as of 11:40, 12/19/2024:

The gate valve is open, and the filament of the RGA is on.

The temperatures were steady at:

PID right: barrel upper: 129°C,  RGA volume: 125°C

PID left: barrel lower: 125°C, Lid: 114°C

The RGA flange was 37°C

Cleanroom was 26°C

Note the upper barrel was very close to the emergency shut off temp of 130°C. In the future we may want to either rewire some of the heating tape or lower the set temperature of the right PID controller.

Luis and I are planning on taking an RGA scan of the MR on Sunday before the campus shuts down for the holidays.

Slides

cleaning cleanroom and particle count

• 3:37 pm: started particle count
  • zone 3:
    • 0.3 u: 1205
    • 0.5 u: 748
    • 1.0 u: 249
• zone 4:
  • 0.3 u: 1496
  • 0.5 u: 748
  • 1.0 u: 290
• 3:57 pm: began surface check and wipedown, including softwalls. NOTE: vacuum chamber insulation crumbling at edges, dropping loose flakes. Scatters residue whenever jostled, so wiping it down just releases more. Not enough flakes are being released for it to be a major issue, but definitely something to keep an eye on.
• 4:18 pm: started vacuuming the floor
• 4:29 pm: finished vacuuming the floor
• 4:30 pm: started mopping the floor
• 4:35 pm: finished mopping the floor
• 4:36 pm: started cleaning the buckets
• 4:41 pm: started mopping with IPA wipes
• 4:52 pm: finished mopping with IPA wipes
• 4:52 pm: changed sticky floor mats
• 4:53 pm: started particle count
  • zone 3:
    • 0.3 u: 3367
    • 0.5 u: 1787
    • 1.0 u: 914
• zone 4:
  • 0.3 u: 1039
  • 0.5 u: 498
  • 1.0 u: 249

[Luis, Luke, Tyler]

Vacuum chamber parts were finally received and assembled. After whipping down the parts, the blank was removed from the reducing cross. Then, the zero-length reducer was attached. Lastly, we installed the T that had the argon leak and RGA. The final pump down showed signs of an improved seal since the pressure dropped quite fast. This pressure is well bellow the limit required to use the RGA, argon test leak could be performed some time next week.

[Luis, Luke}

Three RGA scans were taken. The improvement in the amount of HC in the vacuum is visible across the different measurements. Images are attached.

The following images compare the RGA scans from 9/23/24, after the first bake with the new vacuum system, with those from 3/14/24, after bake 12 with the old system.

The first image shows a graph of the raw data and includes the calibrated leak for both curves. As we can see, our new system meets LIGO standards of cleanliness.

The second graph contains the plot of the normalized data.

The following figure displays data acquired on 10/09, and it shows that we are no longer below the cleanliness standard. Also, the system's pressure went up to 1.9x10^-8 Torr (approximately 7x10^-9 Torr previously). This might be due to a leak somewhere in the system. More tests will be performed later.

[Luke, Luis, Mary, Ma]

On 10/22/24 Luke, Ma, Mary and myself ran a leak test, the results are displayed below. The overall pressure of the vacuum was 2.0e-8 and the temperature readings were 26C for the RGA and 25C for the main volume.

[Luke, Luis, Mary, Ma]

On 10/22/24 Luke, Ma, Mary and myself ran a RGA scan, the results are displayed below. The overall pressure of the vacuum was 2.0e-8 and the temperature readings were 26C for the RGA and 25C for the main volume.

As we can see, the vacuum is passing cleanliness standards again.

[Luke, Luis]

On Friday, 11/1/24, the MR was unpackaged and cleaned under the flow bench. We noticed an ink stain on one of the corners of the material. After wiping it down with IPA and Vector Alpha wipes, the stain was removed. However, the material showed some wear.

After cleaning, we placed it in the bake station and applied a stainless steel baking protocol. On Tuesday, 11/4/24, the material was removed from the furnace and packaged in a static shielding bag. The MR was wrapped in Vector Alpha wipes.

[Luis, Luke, Ma Michael]

The isolation test was conducted on the vacuum system. Every pump was turned off under vacuum, and pressure measurements were taken every minute for 15 minutes. The results are displayed in the sheet linked at the end of this report. The pressure of the main volume dropped very slowly.

The pressure of the RGA Volume dropped in an exponential manner. The test had to be paused at 11 minutes due to concerns about the pressure exceeding the lowest permitted level for the RGA filament.

After the ISO test was performed, we attempted to tighten the bolts of the small turbo pump on the RGA Volume. However, we noticed that the pressure had increased by nearly an order of magnitude, going from 3.27 × 10^-9 Torr to 1.45 × 10^-8 Torr when both volumes were separated. We conducted a leak test for that particular flange and found a concerning leak of 2.15 × 10^-8 Torr, which had previously been 1.9 × 10^-9 Torr. We believe the copper seal was damaged during the ISO test.

View the results sheet

[Luis,Shane]

An RGA scan was taken on Dec 4th. The results are attached at the end of the e-log. As we can see, the scan results are under the allowed limits. After the scan, Shane and I worked on the vacuum connections. The filament was turned off, and the RGA was disconnected from Spica.

After we finished the tests, we reconnected the RGA and attempted to turn the filament back on. However, the program was unable to connect to the instrument. We checked for any loose connections but did not find anything. The RGA connection needs to be troubleshot and fixed.

[Luke, Luis]

After the gasket replacement performed on Monday (11/18/24) we let the vacuum pump down to UHV pressure for a couple days. Today (11/20/24) we measured the pressure to be 5.30*e^-9 with a temperature of 22C, and we performed a leak test and RGA Scan.

Here are the results: