| ID |
Date |
Author |
Category |
Subject |
|
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 |
|
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 |
|
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. |
|
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 |
|
224
|
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 |
|
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. |
|
222
|
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. |
|
221
|
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. |
|
220
|
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 |
|
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 |
|
218
|
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 |
|
217
|
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 |
|
216
|
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. |
|
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 |
|
214
|
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 |
|
213
|
Wed Apr 15 08:48:09 2020 |
danek kotlinski | Module doctor | Wolfram's tests from 14/4/20 |
two of are fixed and can be re-tested
M1623 tbm bond
M1657 bond roc 15
the others need further investigation, maybe a new tbm, maybe closer wire-bond inspection
M1633 roc 0-3 programmable, but no readout, unclear
M1635 roc 12-15 programmable, but no readout (except for roc 12), no token passed
M1653 roc 12-15 not programmable, otherwise ok, sda? tbm?
M1671 some problem with roc 14/15, unclear |
|
212
|
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. |
|
211
|
Tue Apr 14 17:19:44 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Full test | FT of M1668, M1669, M1670, M1672 |
M1668: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for several ROCs
M1669: Grade B due to ROC2 mean noise >200e
M1670: Grade B due to ROC1 mean noise >200e
M1672: Grade B due to mean noise >200e for several ROCs |
|
210
|
Tue Apr 14 16:54:31 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Other | M1633 cable disconnected |
We do not have any more module holders.
M1633 was in "Module doctor" tray.
I took module off the holder and put it in a gel-pak. |
|
209
|
Tue Apr 14 15:49:05 2020 |
Andrey Starodumov | Reception test | RT of M1623, M1657, M1673, M1674 |
M1623: Grade A, should be B due to 71 bump defects in ROC4
M1657: Grade B, due to 51 dead pixels in ROC12
M1673: Grade A, again 31 dead bumps in ROC12
M1674: Grade A, again 39 dead bumps in ROC12 |