Tue Apr 14 17:29:46 2020, Andrey Starodumov, General, ROC4 or ROC12 defects
|
Starting from M1650 almost every module has a cluster of dead pixels or broken bump bonds on
ROC4 or (more often) ROC12. The number of defects varied from 20 to 40.
It's almost excluded that such damage is made at PSI, since both of us: Silvan and me, first time connected the cable
to the module.
It would be interesting to check whether these bare modules arrived all together. |
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 |
Thu Apr 16 15:21:51 2020, Andrey Starodumov, Change TBM , Change TBMs on M1635, M1653, M1671
|
M1635: no data from ROC8-ROC11 => change TBM1
M1653: ROC12-ROC15 not programmable => change TBM0
M1671: no data from ROC12-ROC15 => change TBM0
Modules to be given to Silvan |
Thu Apr 16 17:31:16 2020, Andrey Starodumov, Full test, FT of M1662, M1675, M1676
|
M1662: Grade C due to failure of ROC4 in almost all tests: PixelAlive, PH calibration etc
Should be investigated and retested. At Reception PixelAlive etc was OK, only one double column showed problems
M1675: Grade B due to mean noise > 200e for several ROCs
M1676: Grade B due to mean noise > 200e for several ROCs |
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 |
Mon Apr 20 15:20:07 2020, Andrey Starodumov, Reception test, Change TBMs on M1635, M1653, M1671
|
Andrey Starodumov wrote: | M1635: no data from ROC8-ROC11 => change TBM1
M1653: ROC12-ROC15 not programmable => change TBM0
M1671: no data from ROC12-ROC15 => change TBM0
Modules to be given to Silvan |
After TBMs have been changed:
M1635: the same no data from ROC8-ROC11
M1653: reception test Grade A
M1671: the same no data from ROC12-ROC15
M1635 and M1671 to module doctor for final decision |
Mon Apr 20 17:09:12 2020, Andrey Starodumov, HDI test, 4 HDIs tested
|
After staying in 90%+ RH 2 HDIs became flat. The first one was easy to mount on an HDI holder.
But after 1-2hrs the second HDI became bent again, but still remained flexible, so was also easy to mount.
I put 2 more HDIs in the same conditions and after 2 hrs was able to mount and test them.
4041, 4043, 3033, 3041 tested. All OK. |
Tue Apr 21 15:34:57 2020, Andrey Starodumov, General, Retesting starts today
|
From today we will retest modules that have been tested with pXar SW versions earlier than March 18.
There were a few changes before this date:
1) trimming VCal: 40->50
2) threshold at which trim bit test is done
3) improvements in PH optimization algorithm
No changes in test algorithm have been introduced since March 18.
All modules have been tested with CtrlReg=9, for this several modules failed at +10C.
From now on for test CtrlReg=17 will be used.
Ft will be shorter: only one test at -20C, no T-cycling and one test at +10C. Leakage current will be measured up to 200V. |
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. |
Wed Apr 22 17:28:42 2020, Andrey Starodumov, HDI test, 11 HDIs tested
|
After keeping HDIs in a very high RH for a dew hours (24 is fine) became flat and could be fixed on HDI holder by vacuum.
11 HDIs were tested, all good:
3036, 3043, 3034, 3044, 1034, 6006, 6007, 6005,
6002, 6004, 6001 |
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 |
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. |
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 |
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 |
Thu Apr 23 18:01:16 2020, Andrey Starodumov, HDI test, 4 HDIs tested
|
The following HDIs are tested:
6007: OK
1034: Failed due to not working Channel 1 in CLK0, CTR0, SDA0 and SDA1
6006: OK
5021: OK |
Fri Apr 24 13:56:11 2020, Andrey Starodumov, HDI test, 3 HDIs tested
|
Following HDIs tested from the box "to be understood":
5021, 3019, 5008. All are fine. |
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. |
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! |
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 |
Mon Apr 27 14:21:17 2020, Andrey Starodumov, HDI test, 3 HDIs tested
|
# remaining HDIs from "to be understood" box were tested after flattening them during weekend in RH=99.9% box.
6024, 4034 are OK
1039 bad: no data from A1 and A2 DTB outputs, flat output |
|