90 likes | 218 Views
UCSB Module LT Testing. Data Taking. Scenarios used Standard LT scenario (night.lt) 1 thermal cycle, tests at 20 C, -20 C, 20 C Qualification scenario (3day-1daycold.lt) 1 day thermal cycling, 1 day -20 C, 1 day thermal cycling No verification/fault finding done by UCSB
E N D
Data Taking • Scenarios used • Standard LT scenario (night.lt) • 1 thermal cycle, tests at 20 C, -20 C, 20 C • Qualification scenario (3day-1daycold.lt) • 1 day thermal cycling, 1 day -20 C, 1 day thermal cycling • No verification/fault finding done by UCSB • Patrick has been analyzing the data for us, telling us if runs OK • Not a good idea for production. Would have lag-times in which we would have to find modules and re-test them. • We need the tools to do this semi-automatically • No comparison of data to ARCS data done yet • We currently take a noise and LED run on the ARCS to confirm nothing changed. If anything does, then we look at root file • We definitely need a tool to compare ARCS and LT data to check for differences, confirm good data
second sensor which failed Vienna Strasbourg
Pre-series II sensors: optical inspection • systematic optical inspection done, but only for the 10 first sensors tested (corresponding to 4 different batches): • all of them were fine before the test (not touched since they left STM) • after the test: stains and mainly dots seen for ALL of them (see next) Þ clear ageing effect again!
ID 34572225 which failed the test only the most terrible pictures!
Database • Currently we are doing nothing at UCSB with database, xml generation, validation, or uploading • Again, Patrick has been saving us over the short term • Clearly, we need to do this on site as well • Preferably in a semi-automatic way which could also check the quality of the data • We need to develop tools similar to the gantry database which will automatically move the root files to a common area, generate the xml, check the xml quality, and finally upload the data • I believe that the Defect Analyzer package Patrick has recently been using could do most of the work • We will need to write a tool for checking the xml quality
Equipment • We are short 1 PAACB from running 10 slots • Does FNAL have a spare 1 (or 2 if they have more spares)? • So far, our +5V LV supply failed/overheated and we have blown two fuses on the Vienna box power supply • We have spares of both • After replacing backplane and using extensions, 2 slots not working • We need help in de-bugging these 2 slots and a set of procedures on how to de-bug these failures in the future.
Data Handling Short Term • Patrick will show FNAL/UCSB how to use LTmacro and the Defect Analyzer • Need volunteers at FNAL/UCSB to run programs • Check data visually • Need macro to make all plots needed (I-t especially) • Manually check xml files until we believe results • Manually update data
Data Handling Long Term • Need a tool of move root file to analysis area (if necessary) • Need to tune/confirm LTmacro and Defect Analyzer • Hopefully Patrick • Need a tool to automatically run LTmacro in files in area • Need volunteer • Need a tool to automatically run Defect Analyzer • Need volunteer • Need a tool to confirm data is good in xml file • Need volunteer at both sites • Need a tool to upload xml files • Need volunteer • Need a tool to compare ARCS and LT data • Either compare macro outputs or bad channel flags in database • I believe the comparing bad channel flags in the database will be easier to maintain over the production • Again another volunteer