CMS Pixel Detector Miscellaneous
Phase 1 Phase 2
Layer 1 Replacement Layers 2-4
  Layer 1 Replacement Elog, Page 4 of 13  Not logged in ELOG logo
New entries since:Thu Jan 1 01:00:00 1970
Entry  Wed Apr 29 08:48:06 2020, Urs Langenegger, Other, M1539 
M1539 showed no readout. I tried, all without success,
- reconnecting the cable to the adapter multiple times
- connecting to the adapter in the blue box
- reconnecting the cable to the MOLEX on the module
Entry  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
Entry  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.
Entry  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
Entry  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
Entry  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!
Entry  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.
Entry  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.
Entry  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
Entry  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
Entry  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
Entry  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.
    Reply  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
       Reply  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.
Entry  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
Entry  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.
Entry  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.
Entry  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
    Reply  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
Entry  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
Entry  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
Entry  Wed Apr 15 17:14:42 2020, danek kotlinski, Module transfer, move 4 modules to gel-packs 
Moved to gel-apcks:
1629 B
1631 B
1660 C
1665 classifed as B in MoreWeb but has 170 pixel failures
    Reply  Wed Apr 15 17:33:53 2020, danek kotlinski, Module transfer, move 4 modules to gel-packs 

danek kotlinski wrote:
Moved to gel-apcks:
1629 B
1631 B
1660 C
1665 classifed as B in MoreWeb but has 170 pixel failures


M1665 is graded B since there is no a single ROC with >4% of damaged pixels (max 120 in ROC5). 170 pixel failures are totally in the module.
Entry  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
ELOG V3.1.3-7933898