1 / 10

Finding ST Sensors that cause CMN: A Follow up to TSC Meeting N. 215

Finding ST Sensors that cause CMN: A Follow up to TSC Meeting N. 215. Prof. J. Incandela UC Santa Barbara US CMS Tracker Project Leader Tracker Steering Committee Meeting Number 216 March 4, 2004 These slides were prepared with the help of Tony Affolder and are based upon

neville-kane
Download Presentation

Finding ST Sensors that cause CMN: A Follow up to TSC Meeting N. 215

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. Finding ST Sensors that cause CMN: A Follow up to TSC Meeting N. 215 Prof. J. Incandela UC Santa Barbara US CMS Tracker Project Leader Tracker Steering Committee Meeting Number 216 March 4, 2004 These slides were prepared with the help of Tony Affolder and are based upon work done this past week by the dedicated efforts of the UCSB production group

  2. As of TSC #215 held on Feb. 27 2004, UCSB had in stock 22 sensors which upon reprobing showed a current change of DI > 1.5 mA These sensors were probed both at UCSB and U Rochester with uniform results (like many of those reported on this last tracker week) We ordered these sensors by increasing DI We built 8 modules with 9 of these sensors We picked every other sensor in the ordered list starting with the one with the lowest DI The sensor with large DI was always placed in position furthest from hybrid in module construction 1 module was built with 2 “bad” sensors 6 of 8 modules have common mode noise Of the two modules withoutcommon mode noise: The “bad” sensor had < 2 mA of increased current Increased noise is seen around a known, and hence unbonded, pinhole The other module now has current consistent with QTC measurement after construction We expect ~11 of the 13 sensors remaining from the original 22 will cause CMN in modules Is Increased Bias Current and CMN Correlated?

  3. 5104 • Sensors • 20275912 • 21738507 • Channels • 442 at 80V • Increased bias current seen at 60V in sensor reprobing

  4. 5110 • Sensors • 31215014 • 14308304 • Channels • 203 at 70V • Increased bias current seen at 30V in sensor reprobing • 251 at 130V • Increased bias current seen at 130V in sensor reprobing

  5. 5124 • Sensors • 24104717 • 31830607 • Channels • 160-162 at 150V • Increased bias current seen at 250V in sensor reprobing

  6. 5160 • Sensors • 15061422 • 21174105 • Channels • 86-90 at 200V • Increased bias current seen at 220V in sensor reprobing

  7. 5232 • Sensors • 14842724 • 14842701 • Channels • 505,506 at 350V • Increased bias current seen at 400V in sensor reprobing

  8. 5294 • Sensors • 20825319 • 20833807 • Channels • 280, 281 at 250V • Increased bias current seen at 250V in sensor reprobing

  9. Updated Correlation Plot • All CMN modules built at UCSB to date: • 12 of 13 sensors with DI >3 mA caused common mode noise • 2 of 9 modules with DI between 2-3 mA caused common mode noise

  10. Conclusions • The correlation is strong and it is at the same level first seen last summer. It is no fluke. • It is therefore not at all difficult to identify affected sensors.

More Related