1 / 19

Status of TOB Modules & Rods

Status of TOB Modules & Rods. J. Incandela For the US CMS Tracking Group Tracker Week, Feb. 2004. US CMS Tracker Group. 20 joined group this past year – few more needed at both sites 10 left the group (includes KSU). Brown University R. Hooper, G. Landsberg, C. Nguyen, H. Nguyen

jolie
Download Presentation

Status of TOB Modules & Rods

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Status of TOB Modules & Rods J. Incandela For the US CMS Tracking Group Tracker Week, Feb. 2004

  2. US CMS Tracker Group 20 joined group this past year – few more needed at both sites 10 left the group (includes KSU) • Brown University • R. Hooper, G. Landsberg, C. Nguyen, H. Nguyen • University of California, Riverside (UCR) • P. Gartung, G. Hanson, G.Y. Jeng, G. Pasztor • University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) • A. Affolder, S. Burke, C. Campagnari, F. Garberson, D. Hale, J. Incandela, • P. Kalavase, S. Kyre, J. Lamb, R. Taylor,D. Stuart, D. White + technicians • University of Illinois, Chicago (UIC) • E. Chabalina, C. Gerber, L. Nigra, T. Ten • Fermilab (FNAL) • M. Demarteau, A. Ronzhin, K. Sogut, L. Spiegel, S. Tkaczyk + technicians • University of Kansas (KU) • P. Baringer, A. Bean, L. Christofek, D. Coppage • Mexican Consortium: • Cinvestav: H. Castilla, R. Perez, A. Sanchez • Puebla: E. Medel, H. Salazar • San Luis Potosi:A. Morelos • University of Rochester (UR) • R.Demina, R. Eusebi, E. Halkiadakis, A. Hocker, S. Korjenevski, P. Tipton

  3. Module Types Built in US TOB r-phi TOB stereo TEC R7 TEC R5S TEC R5P TEC R6

  4. Perspective • Good parts are arriving • Deliveries will not be smooth – hybrids in particular are a worry • Prof. David Stuart (UCSB) to take establish parallel US vendor • The schedule requires • Higher than expected peak production rates • Extremely robust and stable production lines • Well trained personnel with backups • Previous demonstrated module rate 15/day/site • Module production rates now required: • FNAL: 18/day sustainable and 24/d peak • UCSB: 21/d sustainable and 30/d peak • Hybrids wirebonding and thermal testing • Several improvements have been made that reduce the cycle time of the test-stand to around 30’ (was ranging from 45 to 70 minutes)

  5. Preparations • Studied and then improved production work flow • Analyzed failure modes of all systems • Find everything that could interrupt production: Acquire spares http://hep.ucsb.edu/cms/cms.html • Cross-train technicians • All persons with critical tasks must have backups • Detailed written procedures for every task • Specific training required. Lines of responsibility established. • A list of 25 procedures can be found at: http://hep.ucsb.edu/cms/cms_procedures • US Workshop held at UCSB January 21-22 • Purpose: Exchange experience – standardize procedures • Novel Format: Minimum of powerpoint, counterpoints met directly and in the lab around in equipment in many cases, to exchange ideas • Led to a consideration of a new structure for communication in US

  6. FNAL Assembly Capacity • Added second curing cabinet • 8 plates/day peak rate. • provide moisture in winter. • 10 TOB assembly plates: • 6 R-Phi and 4 stereo. • New people • Two technicians in March

  7. UCSB Assembly Plate/Capacity • Total of 24 plates! (#) = plates added in 2004

  8. Module Testing: Example of Flow Plan Modules Enter Bad Thermal Cycle, Needs Retest Shelf TEC Thermal Cycled Ready For Shipping Shelf Bonded, Untested Modules Shelf If Failed Repairs TEC LT Testing TEC or TOB? Needs Repair Shelf in Bonding Room ARCS Testing If Passed Repaired Modules Shelf TOB Yes Chosen for LT Test? TOB Thermal Cycled Ready For Rod Assembly Can We Fix It? Yes No If Failed No Good ARCS Tested Modules Shelf TEC or TOB? Is the Problem Understood? TEC TOB Yes No If Passed TEC Not Thermal Cycled Ready For Shipping Shelf TOB Not Thermal Cycled Ready For Rod Assembly Failed Modules Shelf Undiagnosed Modules Shelf

  9. Question Can (30 hybrids + 30 modules)/day be comfortably sustained ? Results All hybrids and modules completely tested in a standard 8 hour day Only used 2 of 3 module test stands available Further reductions of testing times have been accomplished since the trial Found that having full complement of testers in the room at one time actually improved efficiency and communication We were able to solve problems faster by shifting manpower and using the integrated experience of all the testers Answer: REQUIRED TESTING THROUGHPUT IS SUSTAINABLE Aside: Hybrids wirebonding and thermal testing Several improvements have been made that reduce the cycle time of the test-stand to around 30’ (was ranging from 45 to 70 minutes) FNAL and UCSB up and running Testing time trial

  10. Module LT Systems • LT systems in final form. • The last steps included • Backplane modification: FNAL. • CCU6 to CCU25: UCSB. • Operation is now stable • I2C errors, missing records & HV problems are gone. • Running a 12 scenario. • Allows 20 modules/d/site

  11. Module Production Summary • Resumed module production late 2004/early 2005 • Pair v4 (type 18) with ST and v5 (type 19) with HPK sensors • We need ST sensors (>=lot 4). • FNAL:127 modules • 108 HPK: 84 L3&4, 24 L5&6 • 1 (marginal) Gantry placement failure, 2 handling accidents • 19 STM: 12 L1&2(rf), 7 L3&4 • UCSB: 65 modules – paused to study bias connection • 26 HPK: 24 L3&4, 2 L5&6 • 1 IV failure • 33 R5S (TEC) 6 R5N (TEC) • All modules test grade A Version 3  sub-type 17 Version 4  sub-type 18 Version 5  sub-type 19

  12. Current Focus/Issues • Bias connection: Ag epoxy studied intensely at UCSB. • 3 sensors (ST) out of 28 TOB modules were found to have poor or open connections to the HV pad. • 20% of sensors on 36 subsequent modules found to have unexpectedly high impedance bias line connections • Performed numerous tests and have consulted many experts • Yesterday found an important clue • Gantry placement doesn’t disrupt the surface of the epoxy bead • We will now be able to devise a systematic remedy • Completing encapsulation studies • Extreme thermal cycles of hybrids completed – no problems seen • Modules heavily irradiated • No problems yet identified with encapsulation • Sent to UCSB for further study • 75 modules encapsulated and to be tested at UCSB • Will now cycle 50 times -30 to + 50C (+80C)

  13. Encapsulation for Reinforcement • Mainly protects bonds but also an alternative to module reinforcement. • Ideally hybrid bond encapsulation would be done by the vendor or at CERN. • Other bonds would be encapsulated after the LT test. • December UCSB did drop tests • No damage for up to 60 g

  14. ARCS Noise Issue • Tests of recent FNAL production with HPK sensors found lower average noise - especially for 4-APV modules. • Practical problem: Great modules fail the ARCS low noise cut! • Production with STM sensors also showed lower noise. • Ruled out ARCS version and any hardware changes. • Previously produced modules have unchanged noise performance. • Points to new hybrid versions: may be batch related • We should switch from absolute to relative cuts. • Absolute levels should nevertheless be used to flag and thus monitor variations

  15. ARCS Noise Reluctant to upload XML files for ‘failing’ modules

  16. Rods • Rod assembly well understood • An issue with the stiffer hybrid cable has been resolved • Single rod testing is under control • Adding a few more "kinks" we get back to where we were with the softer tails. More details in a presentation by Susanne Kyre to US rod testing meeting: http://hep.ucsb.edu/people/kyre/stiff-tail-troubles.ppt • Multi-rod • Have had and resolved many problems with software and hardware • Achieved major milestones • Still have some problems to solve • Need experience with many rods to determine if there are issues with components.

  17. Stiff Tail Solution • Stiffer tail deflects the intercconnect card (top left) • Adding additional kinks to the tail eliminates the problem (top right)

  18. All equipment on hand at FNAL and UCSB Single rod test stands Multi-rod stands with capacity of 8(6) single (double)-sided rods Have been struggling with DAQ stability problems for long term (3 days) burn-in test Much progress recently Frequent communications with Wim B.  SW fixes Improved grounding  I2C communication much more reliable For the past week systems have been quite stable Not sure that we are out of the woods yet But we are clearly on the right track Starting to address bad channel diagnostic procedures Drawing on US experience with module testing Expect to be ready at start of full production ROD Testing Status

  19. Summary • Have studied all possible threats to production stability • Purchased or manufactured spares • Manpower not yet at comfortable level • FNAL 2 new technicians to start in March • UCSB 1 technician just hired at UCSB, 2 more being sought • Have 4 new students plus 2 coming spring/summer • Hiring 2-3 post-docs • Further increased capacity to ~50 modules/day • Systems • All stages of production have been exercised and are near to final except rod testing • Multi-rod stands rapidly converging

More Related