1. Slide 1 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 UCSB Module LT Testing

2. Slide 2 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 Data Taking Scenarios used à Standard LT scenario (night.lt) –1 thermal cycle, tests at 20 C, -20 C, 20 C à Qualification scenario (3day-1daycold.lt) –1 day thermal cycling, 1 day -20 C, 1 day thermal cycling No verification/fault finding done by UCSB à Patrick has been analyzing the data for us, telling us if runs OK à Not a good idea for production. Would have lag-times in which we would have to find modules and re-test them. à We need the tools to do this semi-automatically No comparison of data to ARCS data done yet à We currently take a noise and LED run on the ARCS to confirm nothing changed. If anything does, then we look at root file à We definitely need a tool to compare ARCS and LT data to check for differences, confirm good data

3. Slide 3 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 second sensor which failed Strasbourg Vienna

4. Slide 4 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 Pre-series II sensors: optical inspection systematic optical inspection done, but only for the 10 first sensors tested (corresponding to 4 different batches): à all of them were fine before the test (not touched since they left STM) à after the test: stains and mainly dots seen for ALL of them (see next)  clear ageing effect again!

5. Slide 5 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 ID 34572225 which failed the test only the most terrible pictures!

6. Slide 6 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 Database Currently we are doing nothing at UCSB with database, xml generation, validation, or uploading à Again, Patrick has been saving us over the short term Clearly, we need to do this on site as well à 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 à 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

7. Slide 7 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 Equipment We are short 1 PAACB from running 10 slots à 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 à We have spares of both After replacing backplane and using extensions, 2 slots not working à We need help in de-bugging these 2 slots and a set of procedures on how to de-bug these failures in the future.

8. Slide 8 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 Data Handling Short Term Patrick will show FNAL/UCSB how to use LTmacro and the Defect Analyzer à Need volunteers at FNAL/UCSB to run programs Check data visually à Need macro to make all plots needed (I-t especially) Manually check xml files until we believe results Manually update data

9. Slide 9 Anthony Affolder US Module LT meeting June 17, 2004 Data Handling Long Term Need a tool of move root file to analysis area (if necessary) Need to tune/confirm LTmacro and Defect Analyzer à Hopefully Patrick Need a tool to automatically run LTmacro in files in area à Need volunteer Need a tool to automatically run Defect Analyzer à Need volunteer Need a tool to confirm data is good in xml file à Need volunteer at both sites Need a tool to upload xml files à Need volunteer Need a tool to compare ARCS and LT data à Either compare macro outputs or bad channel flags in database à I believe the comparing bad channel flags in the database will be easier to maintain over the production à Again another volunteer