Current Module LT Capability

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Slide 1L3 Testing Meeting March 7, 2003UCSB Status-Anthony Affolder UCSB Testing Status Anthony Affolder (for the UCSB module testing group) Current testing.
Advertisements

Slide 1Module Testing Meeting March 7, 2003US Hybrid/Module/Rod Testing Model-Anthony Affolder US Hybrid/Module/Rod Testing Model Anthony Affolder (for.
Slide 1 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 UCSB Module LT Testing.
1 Long Term Module Testing-Anthony AffolderTPO, December 11, 2003 Current Module LT Testing Capability Only Vienna Boxes Available  10 slots at each site.
US Module and Rod Production Overview and Plan For the US CMS Tracker Group.
Slide 1UCSB Rod Production presented by Jim LambDOE review, January 20, 2004 UCSB Rod Production UCSB Rod Production, Jan , presented by Jim Lamb.
Slide 1 Anthony Affolder US Silicon Meeting, March 9, 2004 Equipment Status ARCS equipment status à Single module and 4 hybrid DAQ equipment status à Vienna.
Slide 1Rod Production presented by Jim Lamb (UCSB)April 9, 2004 Rod Production Rod Production, April , presented by Jim Lamb (UCSB)
1 US Testing Update-Anthony AffolderTracker Meeting, Feb 10, 2004 US Module Testing Update Anthony Affolder (On behalf of the US testing group) Update.
CMS Tracker Week – Module Test Meeting – April 2003 – Patrick Gartung 1 Status of US long term module testing Patrick Gartung University of California,
Anthony AffolderUS CMS Meeting 12/3/02DAQ Based Systems LV/HV Needs DAQ Power Supply Needs HV à 600 V/~1mA range –0.1-1  A Current Sensing –Over Voltage/Current.
US Module Production June 2, 2005 J. Incandela For the US CMS Tracker Group.
ATF2 Q-BPM System 19 Dec Fifth ATF2 Project Meeting J. May, D. McCormick, T. Smith (SLAC) S. Boogert (RH) B. Meller (Cornell) Y. Honda (KEK)
Status of NA62 straw electronics and services Peter LICHARD, Johan Morant, Vito PALLADINO.
Roberto Tenchini CMS FB December 2004 CMS Tracker The Tracker Cost Review - November 2004.
Fermilab PMG - Results from module testing - April 9, 2004 – E.Chabalina (UIC) 1 Results from module testing E.Chabalina University of Illinois (Chicago)
1 ME1/1 ODMB Production Readiness Review: Schedule and Budget Darien Wood Northeastern University For the ME1/1 Electronics Project.
Trigger Commissioning Workshop, Fermilab Monica Tecchio Aug. 17, 2000 Level 2 Calorimeter and Level 2 Isolation Trigger Status Report Monica Tecchio University.
1 Calorimeters LED control LHCb CALO meeting Anatoli Konoplyannikov /ITEP/ Status of the calorimeters LV power supply and ECS control Status of.
5 June 2003Alan Norton / Focus / EP Topics1 Other EP Topics Some 2003 Running Experiments - NA48/2 (Flavio Marchetto) - Compass (Benigno Gobbo) - NA60.
LIGO-G9900XX-00-M LIGO II1 Why are we here and what are we trying to accomplish? The existing system of cross connects based on terminal blocks and discrete.
FED optical cabling issues Matthew Pearson. Meeting with Jan and Francois at tracker week Discussed the TTC splitter and optical cabling paper design.
Preparations to Install the HBD for Run 6 Craig Woody BNL PHENIX Weekly Meeting January 26, 2006.
J. Valls, CMS L2-L3 Meeting, Sept ROD Production at CERN  ROD Flow During Production  ROD Flow at CERN  ROD Testing Areas  Infrastructure  Equipment.
Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Status of day-one experiment commissioning at COSY Huagen Xu Goa, Mar
Mar 26, 2014 FGClite Power Control TE-EPC-CCE.
Silicon detectors Other components from previous speakers Run and Preparations Overall impression:  heroic and lucky job, because we assembled exp during.
CLAS12 DAQ & Trigger Status
G.Alexeev for Dubna group ITEP, April 28, Muon System Status Report from Dubna.
MICE Collaboration Meeting
10/month is the present production rate 2 FTE + sporadic contributions
2S module geometry updates Module positioning concepts
QUARTIC TDC Development at Univ. of Alberta
Online Software “To Do” List
Things you should not skip about Cloud computing.
ROD assembly and test in US
DAQ Equipment Status 2 fully equipped Vienna boxes at UCSB and FNAL
UCSB Testing Status Anthony Affolder
UCSB Testing Status Anthony Affolder
UCSB Short-term Testing Plan
Results from module testing
Unexpected Failures of Modules on Rods
UCSB Testing Status Anthony Affolder
Hardware Needs (Near Term)
On behalf of the US TOB testing group
First Assembled Rod in US
Software life cycle models
CPM plans: the short, the medium and the long
US Testing Update Anthony Affolder (On behalf of the US testing group)
UCSB Short-term Testing Plan
Operations/Failure Analysis
Hybrid & Module Electrical Testing
US Hybrid/Module/Rod Testing Model
Virtual University of Pakistan
Front End Driver (FED) Crates and Racks +Tracker PSU racks
Electrical Testing at UCSB: Hybrids & Modules
US Module Testing Progress Report
Current Module LT Testing Capability
Operations/Failure Analysis
Operations/Failure Analysis
Technical Science Scientific Tools and Methods
US Module Testing Progress Report
Operations/Failure Analysis
US Rod Burn-in Readiness DAQ Hardware/Power Supplies
Equipment Status ARCS equipment status DAQ equipment status
GATORADE MX Production
Experiment DAQ and trigger GMn SBS Collaboration Meeting
Hardware needs (ARCS) Current ARCS capabilities at both sites should be able to keep up with production assuming software changes Automatic I-V curves,
CSC Electronics Installation and Commissioning Oct ‘06
Racks PC Rack >> 24 mini and 12 tall PC racks Mini Racks
Presentation transcript:

Current Module LT Capability Only Vienna Boxes Available 10 slots at each site 75% efficiency of running Will estimate the amount of time run per module with: 50,100 module tested at each site 1 month, 2 months, 4 months run periods Will assume 1 week at end to pull together results and 1 week lost to produce modules, procure & test module components, etc.

Current Time Estimates 1 Month 2 Months 4 Months 50 Modules 2 ½ Days 7 Days 16 Days 100 Modules 1 ¼ Days 3 ¼ Days 8 Days Modules Per Site To run 100 modules for ~week each will need either: Both sites running for ~2 months 1 running for ~4 months Any production beyond the 100 modules mentioned disrupts this test significantly Any new modules would have to be put into Vienna box for testing as rods will not be available at rates to burn-in on rods Thus, more modules could be run, but for less time Even more time lost to loading/etc. How long do we want to the modules?

Way To Increase Modules Run Run modules on rods in rod burn-in box To get statistics needed (~100 modules) 16 single sided rods needed Two fully equipped/functional rod burn-in boxes Or multiple runs with smaller number of rods Calculate time run assuming: 2, 4, or 8 rods per box DAQ components for 2 rod running should be available at end of December 2, 3, or 4 running periods Assume 1 month to commission system to point that it is safe enough to run safety unattended Assume 75% efficiency Very aggressive, assumes that software and hardware works almost immediately and that system scales from 1 to 8 rods with no major problems Assume 2 weeks total to pull together results, debugging rods, etc.

Rod Burn-in Time Estimates 2 Months 3 Months 4 Months 2 Rods 3 Days 8.5 Days 14 Days 4 Rods 6 Days 17 Days 28 Days 8 Rods 12 Days 34 Days 56 Days Rods Per Cycle To get more significant running time per module (2 weeks) Need 4 months with 2 rod per cycle capability Need 3 months with 4 rod per cycle capability Need 2 months with 8 rod per cycle capability If a month per module is preferred, need 4-8 rod per cycle capability in order to finish test in time period given Would take significant manpower, hardware increases, and software and data analysis development Takes resources from other commitments: TOB/TEC hybrid PA wirebonding/testing, starting TEC module production, ramp up of TOB module production, finalization of module LT setups

Difficulties in Rod Burn-in Plan Assumes equipment/hardware we do not have yet: 13 assembled rods PS cables 2 rods per cycle still need: 3 Delphi LV PS 2 OFED (2 OEC each) 2 oMUX crates with 3 oMUX each 4 rods per cycle still need: 7 Delphi LV PS 4 OFED (2 OEC each) 2 oMUX crates with 5 oMUX each 8 rods per cycle still need: 15 Delphi LV PS 8 OFED (2 OEC each) 4 oMUX crates with 5 oMUX each Assumes software we do not have yet LT only shown to work on 1 rod May not be expandable (Multiple oMUX crates, number of modules, etc.) Not clear how to analyze output yet Not clear how stable system is with 1 rod Slow controls/Interlocks have not been tested with a rod Data Analysis/Monitoring programs not written yet