1. US Module Production Prof. J. Incandela US CMS Tracker Project Leader For the US CMS Tracker Group Tracker Meetings - CERN Feb. 13, 2004

2. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 2 US Responsibility 5.4 m 2.4 m Outer Barrel (TOB) End Caps (TEC) Up to 2000 TEC Modules for rings at large radii and hybrid processing for all Rings

3. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 3 Current Status Module production lines at >90% preparedness Final equipment & personnel now falling into place as per our plan to upgrade capacity to 15 modules per day per site. Both sites have recently obtained or achieved the following 4 hybrid test stands Fully automated wirebonding Automated surveys of modules on gantry plates with OGP Roughly adequate module test and burn-in equipment Skilled manpower Rod assembly, testing and LT test Also here final pieces are coming together Both sites have recently obtained Assembly tools and fixtures (From CERN and UCSB) Single-rod test boxes Rochester boxes (8 rod LT) Adequate power supplies/cables to make one stand fully functional (some to be shipped to us this week).

4. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 4 US Group Fermilab (FNAL) M. Demarteau, M. Hrycyk, A. Ronzhin, K. Sogut, L. Spiegel, S. Tkaczyk + 5 tech. Kansas State University (KSU)  Pixels (but W. Kahl will still pitch in) University of California, Riverside (UCR) Gail Hanson, Gabriella Pasztor, Patrick Gartung University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) A. Affolder, S. Burke, C.Campagnari, D. Hale, (C. Hill), J.Incandela, S. Kyre, J. Lamb, S. Stromberg, (D. Stuart), R. Taylor, D. White + 7 tech. University of Illinois, Chicago (UIC) E. Chabalina, C. Gerber, T. Timour University of Kansas (KU) P. Baringer, A. Bean, L. Christofek, X. Zhao University of Rochester (UR) R.Demina, R. Eusebi, E. Halkiadakis, A. Hocker, S.Korjenevski, P. Tipton Mexico:3 institutes led by Cinvestav Cuidad de Mexico 1-2 more groups are in the process of joining us

5. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 5 Hybrid Wire Bonding/Thermal Cycling UCSB stand fully commissioned 28/d without difficulty 80 hybrids bonded and thermal cycled 4 PLL failures -20C 2 APV failures Several with opens FNAL stand complete and shipped from UCSB Received yesterday Operational by end of Feb. Mexico City box under construction Ready ~ April Nominal capacity = 84 hybrids per day, but hope to distribute load to Mexico City in order to free up resources at module production centers

6. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 6 Vienna Boxes Fully operational @ both sites 10 modules for 10(14) hours with 1(2) thermal cycles PedRun, CalRun, IVRun. 2 grad. students and 2 technicians trained in operation of box

7. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 7 Demonstrating High Rates Plan Sustain our targeted steady-state rate for 2 weeks at each site Firmly demonstrate new peak capacity of 15 modules/day. Determine if module fabrication and testing capabilities are truly adequate or need more tuning Build many modules starting w/the best STM sensors Plan agreed upon at December CMS week See if there exist subgroup of acceptable sensors Schedule for 2 week production runs of 150 modules UCSB: January 26 to February 9 – completed FNAL: February 23 to March 8 – in preparation UCSB Results Met production and testing targets without difficulty Very low rate of introduced failures seen But no change in the rate of occurrence of modules with CMN Did not depend on production period or sensor grading No sub-classifications of STM sensors appear to be immune

8. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 8 TOB Module Production 5 TOB r   assembly plates, each with 3 new modules curing under vacuum. UCSB Gantry Team at work Full plate survey on OGP

9. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 9 UCSB 150 Modules Run: Mechanical Precision (1) Delta Sili1X3 Sili2X1 Sili1 Sili2 Angle Arrows  current specifications 150 module production run: 10d period @ 15 modules/day

10. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 10 UCSB 150 Modules Run: Mechanical Precision (2) Sili1 to Frame Angle Sili2 to Frame Angle

11. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 11 UCSB 150 Modules Run: Mechanical Precision (3) Hybrid Y2-Y2nom Delta Sili1X1 HybridX1

12. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 12 UCSB 150 Module Run: Gantry 8 modules flagged out of 150. Only 3 are at all serious; all 3 correspond to the same plate and position Module #ProblemLocation 5061Hybrid Y2-Y2nom = 245umPlate 4, position 1 5072Sili1/Sili2 angle = 11 mdegPlate 4, position 2 5075Sili1/Sili2 angle = 11 mdegPlate 2, position 1 5091Sili1/Sili2 angle = 14 mdegPlate 2, position 2 5092Sili1/Sili2 Angle = 20 mdeg Sili2 frame angle = 12 mdeg Plate 2, position 2 5153Sili2 frame angle = 11 mdeg Sili2 X3-X3nom = 32 um Plate 1, position 1 5162Sili1/Sili2 angle = 17 mdegPlate 2, position 2 5165Hybrid Y2-Y2nom = 221umPlate 4, position 1

13. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 13 Gantry Lessons Fine-tuning 10 modules/position/plate under stable operating conditions May adjust plates (e.g. plate 2, position 2) Can adopt additional corrections U-rotation corrections Updated X and Y corrections Hybrid positioning Add 0.5 mm thick silicon rubber to feet of hybrid tools to eliminate slipping in placement (demonstrated for one tool in this exercise) Timing experience After-cure surveying of 15 modules and production of 15 new modules (5 plates) usually accomplished in 6 hours if no problems encountered. Provides 2 hours contingency per day for problems, cleanup, preparation, adjustments, etc. A sustainable rate for 2 technicians per 8 hour day

14. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 14 Preparations for Main Production 10 assembly plates are in design or construction* 2 TOB R-phi plates + 2 TOB stereo plates + 2 TEC R6 plates Parts being machined will be delivered by end of February. Will result in totals of 7 + 3 + 3 respectively (We’ve built 7 R6 modules – generally good quality, 1 has CMN) 2 TEC R5N plates Designs nearing completion. Plan to make 1st modules in March 2 TEC R5S (stereo) Designs underway *Based on TPO meeting discussion, may alter quantities

15. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 15 UCSB 150 Module Run: Wirebonding One technician, working alone, kept pace with module assembly 150 TOB modules fully bonded in 10 days More than 50 Hybrids bonded in the same period A streak of more than 100,000 wires without a single failure Lessons Use up a 100 m spool of wire every 2 days purchasing 750 m spools New bonding tool every week Plans K&S 8060 backup bonder arrives this month FNAL 8090’s (3) UCSB 8090

16. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 16 UCSB 150 Module Run: Testing Must keep up with fabrication Sensor selection Vienna grading (A+,A,B) Both sensors same grade Complete set of tests: ARCS quick test Vienna Box 1 thermal cycle (~7 hours) LED tests Lessons: We can comfortably maintain a test rate of 15 module/day Wien box preventive maintenance may be required 112 modules under storage

17. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 17 UCSB Module Quality: Preliminary Results 150 modules tested Failure rates/sources (excluding CMN modules) 0.53% Bad channels on average 0.29% Known bad channels 0.20% Unmarked bad channels 0.032% open hybrid-APV 0.002% module bonding 0.035% bad channels introduced during assembly/bonding Vast majority of introduced failures were on pitch adaptors 101+ modules so far have undergone 8-12 hours in Vienna box with a single thermal cycle Module Grades 126 Grade A 10 Grade B 10 Grade F 11 CMN modules 1 AFTER THERMAL CYCLE 1 doesn’t operate at -20 C Tested in 3 different Vienna box slots 2 missing Al strip metal (over etched, not a scratch) 12 mid-sensor opens in Al 19 mid-sensor opens in Al

18. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 18 CMN modules and sensor grading Sensors graded using Vienna grading rules All sensors were re-probed prior to assembly Sensors sub-divided into three time periods Prior to Week 39, 2002 (Pre-production) Week 39, 2002-Week 12, 2003 (Production improvements being implemented) After Week 13, 2003 (Final Production) 11 Common mode modules found 1 after thermal cycling No significant difference between A+ and A sensors or year of fabrication CMN rate in grade B modules may be higher than grade A+/A Sensor 2001-22002-32003 Total Grade #CMN%# %# % # % GRADE A+321 3.1%4 125.0%1200.0% 4824.2% GRADE A4224.8%1119.1%1616.3% 6945.8% GRADE B 22 313.6%10220.0%100.0% 33515% Total9666.2%25416%2913.4%150117.3%

19. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 19 5018 (built 29-1-04) Sensors 31215017 31215005 Channels 420 at 150 V

20. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 20 5019 (built 2-2-04) Sensors 23863925 14845906 Channels 158 at 300 V

21. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 21 5021 Sensors 24104901 20825302 Channels 122 at 300 V

22. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 22 5081 Sensors 23974205 23974314 Channels 20 at 300 V Intermittent and can decay away

23. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 23 5103 Sensors 15061804 23860212 Channels 270-331 at 40 V Not the usual symptoms …

24. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 24 Sensors 20275916 14739511 Channels 43 at 320 V 405 at 250V 5155

25. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 25 Re-probing Results  I > 5  A  I > 1.5  A Can we rule out time evolution ? Consider a simple evolutionary model*: Exponential decay with a fraction F of all sensors changing such that the population with  I > 5  A grows as F(1 – exp(-t/  ))… *Exercise proposed in a discussion with Guido, Tony, Regina and Joe - Dec. ‘03

26. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 26 Fits Considered various susceptible sub- population fractions F from 0 to 100% and fit for best time constant  Low values of F yield poor fit High values of F yield a decent fit. Best fit occurs for F = 100% as seen at right with an essentially flat growth over time This proves nothing about this model This kind of exercise could only be used to rule out models, not confirm them…this model is not ruled out but we sincerely hope that this is not the real situation. Extrapolating over 10 years 32% sensors causing CMN  54% of modules

27. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 27 Module Time Degradation- Module 689 After 3 months on shelf, FNAL module retested A second chip now has a high noise channel causing CMN Channel previously only had a slightly higher noise

28. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 28 After assembly module was tested (09/08) on ARCS at 400 V and graded “B” (6 faulty channels). No problems observed. Module Time Degradation-705 After LT, one chip shows CMN Similar case among 150 UCSB modules recently completed. (not shown among previous plots - data after Wien box not web accessible – will include in note under preparation)

29. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 29 After sitting on shelf for more than 3 months, module re-tested to find a new pinhole Module Time Degradation-705 II

30. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 30 Rods Recent Efforts Completed the single rod test stands for UCSB and FNAL CERN completed rotisserie and rod handling fixtures UCSB completed module installation tools for US and CERN LT definition of tests and test methods still must be refined Production So far have built 3 SS rods All 3 built in under 2 hours Will build and test 688 rods (+spares)

31. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 31 Rochester LT Stands  The hardware and software are essentially completed for the box.  Multi-rod Software still needs to be developed  The commissioning of the burn- in stands is proceeding well, in advance or production ramp-up  We await full complement of cables and power supplies

32. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 32 Summary & Conclusions US rapidly approaching full production capability Almost all equipment in place New higher rate demonstrated w/good quality at UCSB: Will review residual problems and try to improve procedures, accuracy, quality and efficiency… FNAL to do similar high rate exercise starting in 2 weeks Results for modules with STM sensors New CMN modules Data do not discount possible deterioration over time Retested modules @FNAL show further degradation As stated in September 2003 when I first reported this problem - a good understanding is needed.

33. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 33 5048 Sensors 24102009 24102007 Channels 382 at 250 V

34. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 34 5063 Sensors 31215004 31215007 Channels 170 at 250 V

35. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 35 5119 Sensors 24104723 23974320 Channels 441 at 350 V

36. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 36 Sensors 23974311 15061419 Channels 48 at 310 V 5140

37. US Production – CERN - Feb. 13, 2004 - J. Incandela 37 Fits (low F) Considered various susceptible sub-population fractions F from 0 to 100% and fit for best time constant  Low values of F yield poorest fits as seen for F = 5% at right Extrapolating over 10 years: