| ID |
Date |
Author |
Category |
Subject |
|
236
|
Tue Apr 28 18:11:45 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1586, M1587, M1588, M1589 |
M1586: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1587: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1588: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1589: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs |
|
250
|
Tue May 5 13:58:45 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1582, M1649, M1667 |
M1582: Grade C due to trimming failure in ROC1 for 189 pixels at +10C. This is third time module restesed:
1) February 26 (trimming for VCal 40 and old PH optimization): Grade B, max 29 failed pixels and in few ROCs mean noise
2) April 27: Grade C due to trimming failure in ROC1 for 167 pixels at +10C, at -20C still max 45 failed pixels and in few ROCs mean noise
3) March 5: Grade C due to trimming failure in ROC1 for 189 pixels at +10C, at -20C trimming failure in ROC1 for 157 pixels
The module quality getting worse.
M1649: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in ROC11
M1667: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in few ROCs
M1582 is in C* tray. To be investigated. |
|
235
|
Tue Apr 28 18:06:41 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1582, M1583, M1584, M1585 |
Modules tested om Apr 27
M1582: Grade C due to 167 pixels failed trimming on ROC1 at +10C only. Previous test on Feb 26 at +10C was graded B!
M1583: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1584: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1585: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1582 goes to C* tray. To be checked later. |
|
252
|
Wed May 6 16:24:21 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1580, M1595, M1606, M1659 |
M1580: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in ROC5/8 and trimming failures for 100+ pixels in the same ROCs at +10C, previous result of April 27 was better
M1595: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in few ROCs, previous result of April 30 was much worse with 80/90 pixels failed trimming in ROC0 and ROC15
M1606: Grade C due to 192 pixels failed trimming in ROC2 at +10C, previous result of April 6 was much better with B grade
M1659: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in few ROCs, previous result of Aplirl 7 was almost the same
M1606 to tray C* for further investigation |
|
233
|
Mon Apr 27 13:50:09 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1578, M1579, M1580, M1581 |
M1578: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs and 67 pixels failed trimming in ROC1 at -20C
M1579: Grade A
M1580: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs and 59/112 pixels failed trimming in ROC5/ROC8 at +10C
M1581: Grade B due to mean noise >200e and 120/120 pixels failed trimming in ROC8/ROC13 at both temperatures |
|
251
|
Wed May 6 13:20:28 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1574, M1581, M1660, M1668 |
Modules tested on May 5th
M1574: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in ROC10 and trimming failures for 89 pixels in ROC0, the same as the first time April 24 (there 104 pixels failed)
M1581: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in ROC8/13, no trimming failures in ROC8/13, as it was on April 27 (120+ pixel in ROC8/13 failed) -> Resalts improved!
M1660: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in few ROCs, no more trimming failure for 172 pixels in ROC7 as it was on April 7 in ROC7 -> Results improved!
M1668: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in few ROCs results are worse than were on April 14: one more ROC with mean noise > 200e
resume: for 2 modules results are improved for 2 others almost the same |
|
232
|
Mon Apr 27 13:23:47 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1573, M1574, M1576, M1577 |
Test has been done on April 24
M1573: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1574: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs and trimming failed for >100 pixels and RelGainWidth too wide for ROC0
M1576: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1577: Grade B due RelGainWidth too wide for ROC13 at +10C, at -20C graded A! |
|
200
|
Wed Apr 8 17:09:05 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1572, M1661, M1663, M1664 |
M1572: Grade B due to mean noise of ROC4 211 electrons
M1661: Grade B due to mean noise of a few ROCs > 200 electrons and in ROC12 44 pixels failed threshold cut
M1663: Grade B due to mean noise of a few ROCs > 200 electrons
M1664: Grade B due to mean noise of a few ROCs > 200 electrons and in ROC12 44 pixels failed threshold cut |
|
231
|
Fri Apr 24 13:59:43 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1568, M1569, M1570, M1571 |
M1568: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs and for ROC0 RelGainWidth(=0.1) is twice larger then for other ROCs
M1569: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1570: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1571: Grade C due to trimming for 190 pixels failed in ROC4 at +10C. This is not real failure, the first time this module has been tested the grade was B at 10C (while trimming was done for VCal=40)
M1571 goes to C* tray. Solution: either repeat the current test or test only at +10C and merge later. |
|
228
|
Thu Apr 23 17:26:51 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1561, M1564, M1565, M1566 |
M1561: Grade B due to several ROCs mean noise >200e
M1564: Grade B due to two ROCs mean noise >200e
M1565: Grade B due to two ROCs mean noise >200e
M1566: Grade B due to two ROCs mean noise >200e |
|
182
|
Fri Apr 3 17:29:51 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1557, M1591, M1649, M1651 |
M1557: C due to 214 pixel threshold failure in ROC4 only at +10C (several previous FTs at +10C were graded B!)
M1591: B due to mean noise > 200electrons for several ROCs
M1649: C due to 270 pixel threshold failure in ROC11 only at +10C
M1651: B due to mean noise > 200electrons for several ROCs
For both modules C grading is an artifact. Should decide how to proceed with such cases.
M1557 and M1649 will be placed for the moment in C* tray. |
|
227
|
Thu Apr 23 13:37:29 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1556, M1557, M1559, M1560 |
M1556: Grade B due to several ROCs mean noise >200e
M1557: Grade B due to several ROCs mean noise >200e and trimming failed for 60 pixel in ROC4 at -20C
M1559: Grade A
M1560: Grade B due to several ROCs mean noise >200e |
|
247
|
Mon May 4 14:13:39 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1552, M1553, M1595, M1597 |
FT on April 30th
M1552: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for ROC7,8
M1553: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1595: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs at -20C and the same + trimming failes for ROC0 (82 pixels) and ROC15 (94 pixels)
M1597: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs |
|
241
|
Thu Apr 30 15:25:36 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1548, M1549, M1550, M1551 |
M1548: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for ROC11
M1549: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for ROC2. In total 200+ pixels failed trimming in the module -> investigate???
M1550: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for ROC5
M1551: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for a few ROCs
M1549 in tray C* for investigation |
|
146
|
Thu Mar 26 17:45:15 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1545, M1557, M1627, M1628 |
Retested M1545: C->B (to be correct on the MoreWeb summary page)
Retested 1557: C->C in one ROC >160 pixels failed to be trimmed Module placed in a tray C*
1627: B
1628: B
All B grades due to high (>200electons) mean noise. |
|
180
|
Fri Apr 3 15:21:54 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1545, M1557, M1627, M1628 |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: | Retested M1545: C->B (to be correct on the MoreWeb summary page)
Retested 1557: C->C in one ROC >160 pixels failed to be trimmed Module placed in a tray C*
1627: B
1628: B
All B grades due to high (>200electons) mean noise. |
Final grade in the MoreWeb summary page is corrected.
Module graded B. |
|
219
|
Fri Apr 17 18:05:45 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1542, M1557, M1630, M1649 only at +10C |
M1542 has grade C for relative gain width. Was tested with early versions of test SW with trim VCal=40 and not yet optimized PH optimization/calibration.
Other modules have grade C only at +10C. This time CtrlReg=17 instead of 9 is used/
M1542: Grade B due to 61 pixels failed Threshold criteria (trimming)
M1557: Grade B due to mean noise and NOT any more like in FT 214 pixels failed Threshold criteria
M1630: Grade B due to mean noise and NOT any more like in FT 3883 pixels in ROC1 failed Gain criteria
M1649: Grade B due to mean noise only in one ROC and NOT any more like in FT 270 pixels failed Threshold criteria |
|
223
|
Tue Apr 21 17:39:48 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1542, M1554, M1555, M1653 |
M1542: Grade C due to massive (>1000pixels in total) trimming failures at -20C in ROC11,14,15. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1554: Grade C due to massive (>1000pixels in total) trimming failures at -20C in ROC9,13. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used module was graded B, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1555: Grade B due to 75 pixels had trimming failures at -20C in ROC10. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1653: Grade B due to >1% (~50) pixels had trimming failures at -20C in ROC5,12. |
|
225
|
Wed Apr 22 17:41:11 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1542, M1554, M1555, M1653 |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: |
M1542: Grade C due to massive (>1000pixels in total) trimming failures at -20C in ROC11,14,15. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1554: Grade C due to massive (>1000pixels in total) trimming failures at -20C in ROC9,13. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used module was graded B, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1555: Grade B due to 75 pixels had trimming failures at -20C in ROC10. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1653: Grade B due to >1% (~50) pixels had trimming failures at -20C in ROC5,12. |
Repeat test with CtrlReg=9. ONLY 2 TESTs: -20C, IV@-20C (upto 205V), +10C,IV@+10C (up to 205V)
Warning: at +10C the total leakage current of all modules = 9.7umA!? From yesterday the IV curves: each single module had the current less 0.5-1umA
M1542: Grade B due failure of 41 pixels in trimming of ROC6 at -20C. Grading at+10C is A!
M1554: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in ROC14 at both temperatures
M1555: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in 2 ROC at both temperatures
M1653: Grade B due failure of 45 pixels in trimming of ROC12 and mean noise >200e in ROC0 at both temperatures |
|
226
|
Thu Apr 23 13:34:52 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1542, M1554, M1555, M1653 |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: |
| Andrey Starodumov wrote: |
M1542: Grade C due to massive (>1000pixels in total) trimming failures at -20C in ROC11,14,15. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1554: Grade C due to massive (>1000pixels in total) trimming failures at -20C in ROC9,13. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used module was graded B, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1555: Grade B due to 75 pixels had trimming failures at -20C in ROC10. There was no such problem at previous test when CtrlReg=9 was used, while for the present test CtrlReg=17 was used
M1653: Grade B due to >1% (~50) pixels had trimming failures at -20C in ROC5,12. |
Repeat test with CtrlReg=9. ONLY 2 TESTs: -20C, IV@-20C (upto 205V), +10C,IV@+10C (up to 205V)
Warning: at +10C the total leakage current of all modules = 9.7umA!? From yesterday the IV curves: each single module had the current less 0.5-1umA
M1542: Grade B due failure of 41 pixels in trimming of ROC6 at -20C. Grading at+10C is A!
M1554: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in ROC14 at both temperatures
M1555: Grade B due to mean noise >200e in 2 ROC at both temperatures
M1653: Grade B due failure of 45 pixels in trimming of ROC12 and mean noise >200e in ROC0 at both temperatures |
According to IV curves currents at 150V are: 0.27umA, 0.44umA, 0.49umA, 0.16umA. |