1US Testing Update-Anthony AffolderTracker Meeting, Feb 10, 2004

Total Number of Faults

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Number of Faults (Out of 512 Channels)

Faulty Channel Sources (TOB)Faulty Channel Sources (TOB)• Fault Sources (excluding cable

breaks and CMN) Hybrid-0.004% Sensor (in DB)-0.26% Sensor (not in DB)-0.13%

• Either high noise and/or visible sensor damage

Bonding-0.001% Testing-0.002%

• Total faults – 0.39% We introduce less than 0.01% bad

channels per module on average Grade A Grade B Grade C

Fault Types

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Number of Faults

Hybrid Bonding

Sensor Expected

Sensor Unexpected

Module Bonding

Testing

2US Testing Update-Anthony AffolderTracker Meeting, Feb 10, 2004

Module Testing ProtocolModule Testing Protocol• Module testing has matured greatly with the production of >50 modules

A minimum set of tests was defined• Using ARCS software/hardware

Fault finding algorithms are now tuned to maximize fault finding and fault type identification, while minimizing false bad channel flagging

• Noise performance and shielding standardization has allowed for the same fault finding algorithms to work on the TIB, TEC & TOB modules Minimize the effects of external noise sources Results can be combined for the same module type measured at different

sites in order to further refine testing

• Testing procedures are now almost automated Work to automate testing fault finding module grading database entry

underway

3US Testing Update-Anthony AffolderTracker Meeting, Feb 10, 2004

Fault Finding Using ARCS (1) Fault Finding Using ARCS (1)

Noisy

1 sensor open

2 sensor open

Pinholes

Bad Channel Flags

Noise Measurement Pulse Height Measurement (Using Calibration Pulse)

Bad Channel Flags

Shorts

Pinhole

Opens

4US Testing Update-Anthony AffolderTracker Meeting, Feb 10, 2004

Fault Finding Using ARCS (2) Fault Finding Using ARCS (2) Pinhole Test (Using LED System)

LED Intensity

Cal

ibra

tion

In

ject

ion

Res

pon

sePinhole

Average Subtracted Peak Time (Calibration Pulse)

1 sensor open

2 sensor open

Pinholes

Channel

Ave

rage

Sub

trac

ted

Pea

k T

ime

(ns)

Bad Channel Flags

5US Testing Update-Anthony AffolderTracker Meeting, Feb 10, 2004

Fault Finding Using ARCS (3) Fault Finding Using ARCS (3) • Test failures are correlated in order to

diagnose fault type Open (1 or 2 sensor) Short Pinhole/Saturated Channel Noisy Channels Mid-sensor opens

• Faults are found >99% with correct fault type identified ~90% of the time Misidentification is almost always

between 1 or 2 sensor opens Less than .1% of good channel flagged

as faulty As more modules are built, fault finding

criteria will be re-tuned to improve performance

Integrated into ARCS software by Aachen

• Database output of module testing is being finalized Similar tuning of fault finding underway

for DAQ-based systems

6US Testing Update-Anthony AffolderTracker Meeting, Feb 10, 2004

Test Stand Cross-calibrationTest Stand Cross-calibration• All ARCS systems have had first

iteration of cross-calibrations

• Modules are circulated between testing centers Multiple examples of common

problems are added to each module

• Shorts (neighbors & next-to-neighbors)

• Opens (sensor-sensor & PA-sensor)

• Pinholes

• With new qualification standards, results nearly identical