| ID |
Date |
Author |
Category |
Subject |
|
176
|
Thu Apr 2 22:50:33 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1645, M1646, M1647, M1648 |
| All modules graded B due to mean noise > 200 electrons. |
|
181
|
Fri Apr 3 15:33:10 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1645, M1646, M1647, M1648 |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: | | All modules graded B due to mean noise > 200 electrons. |
Correction:
in reality M1546 has been tested and NOT 1646. M1646 failed Reception due to not working ROC and graded C.
I hope we we will find a way to correct properly the module name and rerun MoreWeb analysis. |
|
185
|
Mon Apr 6 14:23:03 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1645, M1646, M1647, M1648 |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: | | All modules graded B due to mean noise > 200 electrons. |
Correction:
in reality M1546 has been tested and NOT 1646. M1646 failed Reception due to not working ROC and graded C.
I hope we we will find a way to correct properly the module name and rerun MoreWeb analysis. |
Folder with test results has been renamed from M1646 to M1546:
mv M1646_FullQualification_2020-04-02_08h41m_1585809682 M1546_FullQualification_2020-04-02_08h41m_1585809682
Dinko fixed logfiles and .tar file.
Results of M1646 has been removed with python Controller.py -d (remove all rows related to M1646). |
|
172
|
Wed Apr 1 17:10:16 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1641-M1644 |
M1641: B due to mean noise > 200electons for a few ROCs
M1642: B due to mean noise > 200electons for a few ROCs
M1643: B due to mean noise > 200electons for a few ROCs
M1644: B due to mean noise > 200electons for one ROCs at -20C |
|
169
|
Tue Mar 31 18:23:18 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1637, M1638, M1639, M1640 |
M1637: C. Graded C due to not completed first test at -20C. Urs has reported issues. The second -20C after T-Cycle and test at +10C are graded A.
Tomorrow I'll upgrade this module manually to A
M1638: A
M1639: B Due to B at first -20C test. ROC8 mean noise >200electrons. Second -20C and at +10C both are graded A
M1640: B All three FT are B due to several ROCs mean noise >200electrons |
|
178
|
Fri Apr 3 14:15:01 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1637, M1638, M1639, M1640 |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: | M1637: C. Graded C due to not completed first test at -20C. Urs has reported issues. The second -20C after T-Cycle and test at +10C are graded A.
Tomorrow I'll upgrade this module manually to A
M1638: A
M1639: B Due to B at first -20C test. ROC8 mean noise >200electrons. Second -20C and at +10C both are graded A
M1640: B All three FT are B due to several ROCs mean noise >200electrons |
Following procedure of regrading the first -20C test has been manually upgraded to B. The final grade is A since manual upgrade was not taken in to account. I do not know why. So, the module will be graded A. |
|
154
|
Fri Mar 27 18:29:53 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1629, M1630, M1631, M1632 |
M1629: B due to mean noise at -20C
M1630: C due to ROC1 with all pixels failed of PH calibration (Gain). Both FT at -20C are A!
Should be understood and retested. Put in C* tray.
M1631: B due to mean noise in all 3 FT
M1632: A |
|
156
|
Mon Mar 30 14:52:59 2020 |
Danek Kotlinski | Full test | FT of M1629, M1630, M1631, M1632 |
I have tested M1630.
I see not problem with ROC1. See the attached plot.
There is one dcol in ROC12 which shoes the "pattern" problem seen in a few other ROCs.
I think this module is fine, should be B. Could be retested. |
| Attachment 1: m1630_roc1_ph_fits.png
|
|
|
157
|
Mon Mar 30 15:40:52 2020 |
Urs | Full test | FT of M1629, M1630, M1631, M1632 |
M1630 is interesting because (I am using my terminology in the following) for the test at T=+10C ROC1 fails the PH optimization test and by consequence the gain/pedestal test is also failed.
The PH optimization test is failed because the minimum pixel on which the test is based is a 'dead' pixel (according to the PixelAlive test), but unfortunately has hits in the initial PH map. As a result the phscale and phoffset for this ROC are not optimal and this is seen in the gain/pedestal fits.
Please find the plots attached from the T=+10 tests. |
| Attachment 1: phval-curve_M1630_p10_C1.pdf
|
|
| Attachment 2: phshot_vcal255.pdf
|
|
| Attachment 3: pixelalive_C1.pdf
|
|
|
215
|
Wed Apr 15 17:26:46 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1623, M1657, M1673, M1674 |
M1623: Grade B due to rel gain width, in ROC4 74 pixels failed trimming (Threshold) and mean noise >200e
M1657: Grade B due to 70 dead pixels in ROC12 and mean noise >200e
M1673: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in a few ROCs
M1674: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in a few ROCs |
|
131
|
Tue Mar 24 18:09:07 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1615, M1619, M1620, M1622 |
Test results have been analysed with modified code:
M1615: B
M1619: A
M1620: B
M1622: B
One pixel of M1615 still failed mask test but it was not taken in to account in the final grading???
I put it in the shelves for Module doctor. To be decided what to do with this module. |
|
137
|
Wed Mar 25 17:03:11 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1615, M1619, M1620, M1622 |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: | Test results have been analysed with modified code:
M1615: B
M1619: A
M1620: B
M1622: B
One pixel of M1615 still failed mask test but it was not taken in to account in the final grading???
I put it in the shelves for Module doctor. To be decided what to do with this module. |
For Wolfram one channel of M1615 does not work. He noticed that the cable has corrosion (probably this cable has been attached to a module that has been irradiated in Zagreb). After Reception test this module again graded C due to a mask test failure of one pixel in one ROC.
Wolfram proposed to grade this module as C*.
|
|
122
|
Fri Mar 20 18:32:34 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1609-M1612 |
M1609 and M1611 are graded C
M1610 and M1612 are graded B
C and most B grades are due to many trimbit failures. Interesting that this time at +10C there are more failures then at -20C. |
|
134
|
Wed Mar 25 14:17:51 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1609, M1613, M1614, M1618 on Mar 23 |
FT for these modules has been done on Mar 23
M1609: C
M1613: C
M1614: C
M1618: B
All C due to trim bit test failures |
|
190
|
Mon Apr 6 17:18:02 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1606, M1630, M1655, M1566 |
M1606: B due to mean noise of several ROCs> 200e
M1639: C* due to failure many pixels of ROC1 at +10C as before: to be run at +10C with CtrlReg=17
M1655: B due to mean noise of several ROCs> 200e
M1656: B due to mean noise of several ROCs> 200e |
|
117
|
Thu Mar 19 18:01:50 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1605-M1608 |
Only M1607 graded B. All others are graded C due to trimbit test.
M1606 should be looked carefully and may be retested since the threshold after trimming has strange features
(although not for all temperatures) that may mean that some trimbits really do not work.
Other modules to be re-analised without results of trimbit test or upgrade manually, since these results
are due to test algorithm. After trimming the threshold looks good for all failed ROCs. |
|
115
|
Wed Mar 18 17:46:07 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1601-M1604 |
M1601-M1604 passed full test
M1601: grade B
M1602-M1604: Grade C. The main reason is failed pixels during trimbit test.
To be understood the reason and to be upgraded manually. |
|
140
|
Wed Mar 25 18:40:53 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1599, M1613, M1624, M1616 |
M1599: B due to leakage current at +10 (2-3umA)
M1613: B due to a few pixels with bad trimmed threshold
M1624: B due to a few ROCs with mean noise>200electrons
M1626: A |
|
193
|
Tue Apr 7 16:57:01 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1593, M1658, M1659, M1660 |
M1593: B due to Rel.gain width and mean noise of a few ROCs
M1658: B due to threshold and mean noise of ROC15
M1659: B due to threshold and mean noise of a few ROCs
M1660: C due to 172 pixels failed Threshold (trimmed) on ROC7 only at second -20C, the first -20C and +10C trimming threshold is OK for this chip
M1660 to C* tray and retest with all other modules after production, |
|
239
|
Wed Apr 29 18:11:36 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1590, M1592, M1596, M1600 |
Modules tested om April 28
M1590: Grade B Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1592: Grade B Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1596: Grade B Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1600: Grade B Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs |