1. Slide 1Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder CMS Module Testing Issues From a CDF Testing Experience Perspective Anthony Affolder (for the UCSB module testing group)

2. Slide 2Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Talk Overview Review current CMS testing procedures Assorted observations from our limited testing experience on CMS components UCSB module testing à Personnel, equipment, and infrastructure

3. Slide 3Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder CMS Testing Overview Review of current CMS testing procedures à Ensure understanding of testing prior to arrival at FNAL/UCSB –Reproduction of all faults, etc. à Make sure any systematic failures in production techniques/materials found as early as possible –M800 pre-production first chance to produce large quantities of single type of modules –Need to be able to track time development of faults Responsible to aid in answering open questions before large scale production à Need of burn-in of module/optical systems components à Finalization of production procedure à Finalization of testing procedure –Both fault finding and module qualification

4. Slide 4Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Tests Prior to Arrival at FNAL/UCSB APV Chip Testing (1 minute) à Voltage stressing (6 sec) à Basic Functionality –Pedestal –Calibration Injection (2 MIP) –Pipeline FHIT-Industrial Testing (1 minute) à Connectivity à Basic Functionality –Pedestal –Calibration Injection (2 MIP) –Noise Strasbourg à ????? CERN-Pitch adaptor bonding (20 minutes) à Basic functionality –Pedestal –Noise –Calibration Injection (2 MIP) à Capacitive pulsing pitch adaptor à Thermal cycle to –20 C –Repeat test à Warm to room temperature –Repeat test

5. Slide 5Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Testing Concerns Hybrid tested ~1-20 minutes prior to arrival at FNAL/UCSB à Leads to concerns about infant mortality problems à CDF Hybrid Burn-in Experience –4 days with extensive tests at start/end + 3 Day of Module burn-in –~9 out of 8000 chips failed (0.1% of chips) –Same rate would lead to 2%(5%) rework of rod Optical hybrids also will not be burnt-in à CDF optical hybrid experience –3 day burn-in with tests at beginning and end –~10% failed during burn-in (soft number) –Additional 9 DOIM (out of 556) failed during data-taking CDF used custom laser diode system

6. Slide 6Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Testing Concerns (2) Some components of hybrid characterization can be made stronger à Test calibration circuit at multiple injection points à Test pipeline pedestal/noise with larger statistics –CDF calibrations remove bad cells from noise/pedestal calculation à Suggest such test done prior to pitch adaptor bonding Testing requirements can be made more consistent between sites à Pedestal requirement change between test stands à On-chip common mode subtraction “feature” makes noise characteristics of open/saturated channels unpredictable à Common-mode subtraction also different between stands Recent hybrid circuit modifications change LED pinhole tests characteristics

7. Slide 7Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Common-mode Subtraction Differing algorithms used to calculate common mode pedestal for subtraction à ARC –4 groups of 32 channels per chip –Use average as common mode for each section à DAQ –Strips (after subtracting the channel’s average pedestal) are ordered with highest/lowest 10% truncated –Use average of remaining strip as common mode for chip à Final FED –Median channel value (after pedestal subtraction) is used as common mode Use of same algorithms will yield more uniform testing/qualification results between stands

8. Slide 8Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Test System Grounding Issues PC, DAQ/ARC, LV supplies, and HV supply share common ground à Can lead to less than predictable test results –See frequency related noise of prototype rod tests (D. Abbaneo) Suggest that a common mode noise standard is made à With inverter off in peak mode (~0.5 ADC) –Removes on-chip common mode “feature” à Allows for more uniform testing results

9. Slide 9Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Lower Noise Requirements Sensor-Sensor Open Visible Improving grounding until common mode noise less than ~0.5 ADC in peak mode/ inverter off allows the use of raw noise as a powerful tool for finding opens, including the location Sensor-Sensor Pitch Adaptor-Sensor APV-Pitch Adaptor (???) Seen by Charge Injection Zoom in Raw Noise

10. Slide 10Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Upper Noise Requirements High noise only affects signal efficiency (clustering) Use physics (radioactive sources/comic ray stands/collision data) to determine cut value à Expect values to be different for different systems Wider Cut Values SVX

11. Slide 11Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Pedestal Tests (Current) Wafer Probing à Dynamic Range: 0-240 ADC à Average Pedestal: 67.1 –50 <P < 90 ADC Cut FHIT (Industrial Tester) à Dynamic Range:0-240 ADC à Average Pedestal:~90 ±20% Cut:~72<P<108 ARC à Dynamic Range:0-240 ADC à Average Pedestal:~110 –±20% Cut:~88<P<132 DAQ à Dynamic Range:140-380 ADC à Average Pedestal:~170 –±20% Cut:~146<P<194 Pedestal Requirement vary by as much as 70%

12. Slide 12Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Suggested Pedestal Tests Pedestal variation only effects dynamic range of channel’s pre-amp or may indicate pathological problem à Suggest defining pedestal requirements in similar manner as in wafer probing –In wafer probing, absolute pedestal requirements with a given width relative to the mean of the test stand

13. Slide 13Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Gain Measurements Single point gain does not tell full story Convolution of front-end w/ calibration circuit Is there a physics based gain spec? Zero point offset Low gain High gain Gain=-28.3 ADC/MIP Gain=-31.5 ADC/MIP MIP (ICAL=29) input Extreme cases seen:

14. Slide 14Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Gain Measurements (2) Multi-point gain measurements have many advantages à More stable à More uniform between chips –Tighter Cuts à Shows non-linearities –Zero MIP injection à Shows non-uniformities within chip à Calibration very sensitive to environment à Easy to implement Gain Scan (0.5-3.0 MIP) (2 MIP injected)/2 TOB Module 83 TOB Hybrid

15. Slide 15Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder LED pinhole test characteristics will change with bias return line modification  Resistance on hybrid (22k ,100  )  (2.2k ,683  ) R(22 k  ) LED Pinhole Test +0.6-0.7V ???

16. Slide 16Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Bias Ring Voltage Voltage conversion assumes old resistor values in bias return circuit (22K ,100  With new resistor values (2.2K , 681  need ~120  A for regular pinholes need >300  A for “high current” pinholes New Leakage Current (  A) Necessary With New Resistor Values LED Pinhole Tests  May cause damage to sensors!!! (Torsten Franke)

17. Slide 17Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Noise Chip Edge Wings Increase in noise at chip edges à But only in a few pipeline cells à pipeline scan=latency scan In-time interference effect!! à Fairly easy to reduce/avoid à Completely avoidable during test process

18. Slide 18Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Deadtimeless Scan (ISL) Issue two triggers with varying time separation à Measure pedestal and noise at each unit of trigger separation With ISL, every command, chip change of state, and data readout caused pedestal shifts à Would guess similar effect causing wing Removed with DPS at CDF We are willing to pursue such studies (Time Between Triggers)

19. Slide 19Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Suggestions for Improved Test Model Add to the hybrid qualification prior to pitch adaptor bonding à Increase understanding of hybrids by adding more pipeline and gain measurements Make requirements/calculation algorithms consistent through testing process à APV Wafer Probing  FHIT  Strasburg  Pitch Adaptor Bonding  Module Construction  Rod Construction/burn-in –Allows for the reproduction of bad channel lists –Eases tracking of fault creation Motivate requirements for fault finding and on silicon tracker performance à Noise Occupancy à Signal Efficiency à Signal Resolution

20. Slide 20Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Suggestions for Improved Test Model(2) Improve system’s noise performance in order to use the noise as powerful tool à Identification of location of opens w/o LED test Modify deep tests à Suggest different bad channel cuts specific to component type tested à Add fixed requirement to all percentage requirements (relative to average) Use cooling box as module burn-in until shown unnecessary à Reduces reworking during rod assembly à Adds important information about necessity of LED tests for the finding of some pinholes and opens locations à Demonstrates if hybrid burn-in necessary

21. Slide 21Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder CDF Module Burn-in Experience Significant number of pinholes created during burn-in (even after 5 hours running) à L1- 0.166% of strips à L3- 0.052% of strips à L4- 0.033% of strips à ISL-0.0071% of strips 7 additional pinholes created during data-taking à L7 burnt-in at depletion voltage –All other burnt in with 50% over-voltage Early CMS module burn-in will indicate pinhole creation rate and its effect on rod rework rate

22. Slide 22Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Possible Rod Burn-in Issues LED systems seem necessary for discovery of “high current” pinholes and location of opens à In current rod burn-in plan, no LED systems available à May indicate need for new techniques to locate “high current” pinholes and opens –New sensor qualification tests, backplane pulsing, lower common mode noise, etc. Initial module burn-in will determine if this is an issue à All testing tools still available

23. Slide 23Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Testing Conclusions Slight modification of testing program would lead to more uniform and consistent fault finding between different sites/systems à Reduce rework performed on completed rods Location of opens could be identified by combination of noise and internal calibration measurements à Useful for rod burn-in fault finding Modification of HV return circuit necessitates increase of LED intensity in pinhole search à “High current” pinholes may be able to be found with modification of sensor qualification Increase in noise at chip edges likely due to in-time interference effects à We would be willing to study this more thoroughly We are willing to help in defining testing plan/devising tests

24. Slide 24Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder UCSB Short-term Testing Plan Characterize hybrid (+PA) on arrival à Basic functionality, gain scan, and deep test (ARC) Re-characterize module on completion of construction à Basic functionality, gain scan, deep test, and IV curves (ARC) Cold box test fraction of modules (DAQ) à Acts as ~24 hour module burn-in –Identifies mechanical/bond/electrical weaknesses prior to production of large number of modules –Reduces reworking of rod/retrofitting of modules Rod construction/characterization/burn-in (when parts and test setups available)

25. Slide 25Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Testing personnel at UCSB Professors à Joe Incandela à Claudio Campagnari à David Stuart Post-docs à Anthony Affolder à Patrick Gartung (UC-Riverside) Graduate Students à Steve Levy à Shawn Stromburg à +1-2 starting this summer Electrical Engineering Support à Sam Burke ESE Master Student à Anuroop Gupta (Database/programming) + Assorted Undergraduates and Techs (during full production)

26. Slide 26Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Current UCSB Testing Setup Clamshell(UCSB) à Plastic stand-offs –2 Locating Pins à Kapton Extension Cables(UCSB) –Easy connection/disconnection à Solid mounting of DAQ equipment 1 ARC Controller + 1 ARC FE LV & HV Power Supplies Dry Air Clamshell

27. Slide 27Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Testing Facilities High Bay (Ground floor) à Rod assembly/burn-in à Convenient access to loading dock Clean Room (5 th floor Physics) à Adjacent to production area à Module tests –Fault finding and deep tests à Module burn-in station à Visual inspection table

28. Slide 28Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Safety Protocols LV à OVP,OCP HV à Crowbar Protection Electrostatic Protection à Ground mats on tables and floors à Heel straps à Combo tester at clean room entrance à Touch tester at each station (Artist Rendition)

29. Slide 29Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder SOS We need full complement of test equipment ARC (1 of 3) DAQ (0 of 2) Vienna Cold Box Rod Testing Equipment Rod Burn-in Electronics We’re about to begin production without requisite testing equipment or experience with systems!!!!

30. Slide 30Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder BACKUP SLIDES Everything after this is backup slides

31. Slide 31Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder CLEO pinholes CLEO Sensor Testing (C. Campagnari) à Bias applied across coupling capacitor with no bias between p + and n + implants à Asymmetric response to bias by pinholes (like a diode) Appears similar to “high current” pinholes à “High current” pinholed channels shown act saturated only after bias polarity changes across coupling capacitor Bias Voltage (Volts) Leakage Current(Amps)

32. Slide 32Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Test System Grounding Issues (2) Module Testing Final PS System PC LV -5V ARC Controller HV +HV Sensor Hybrid ARC FE 2.5V 1.25V GROUND LOOPS!!! LV HV +HV Sensor Hybrid HVGND GND +1.25V +2.5V DOH AOH Command And Data Cable Optical Cables Patch Panel/ Interconnect Bus

33. Slide 33Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Hybrid Gain Measurement(1) Hybrid Tests on steel plate  Large pickup effects cause large  2 when 0 MIP point included   2 fairly good when excluding zero –Noise of calibration circuit not yet included 0-3 MIPs0.5-3 MIPs

34. Slide 34Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Hybrid Gain Measurement(2) Hybrid Tests in ESD box à Pickup effects greatly reduced à Large variation gain (±5%) variation in third chip Calibration tests have strong dependence on environment/grounding!!!! 0-3 MIPs0.5-3 MIPs

35. Slide 35Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Other Suggestions Central Repository of Schematics à Electrical and mechanical schematic of all components used in the manufacturing and testing of all silicon tracker components à All in a standard format (pdf ??) readable by a standard viewer (abode acrobat version x.y ??) –UCSB willing to start such a repository List of all components with responsible people indicated à With e-mail and web page information Central Repository of Production Checklist à Enables fast determination of procedures done previous to arrival to given site

36. Slide 36Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Example of DAQ/ARC Differences

37. Slide 37Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder On-chip common mode subtraction Inverters share common point à Current flows between channels Regular channel noise:   2  raw 2 -  cm 2 Opens/saturated channel noise:   2  raw 2 +  cm 2 Depending on  cm, open channel have higher/lower noise

38. Slide 38Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Tests Prior to Arrival at FNAL/UCSB(1) APV Chip Testing (1 minute) à Voltage stressing –1.5  VDD (5 seconds) –2.0  VDD (5 seconds) à Basic Functionality –MUX gain –Current Measurement à Pedestal –50-90 ADC à Gain (Single Point) –G > 20 ADC –|G AVE -G chan |<15 ADC à Pipeline –  cell < 2 ADC –|P-P cell |< 5 ADC FHIT-Industrial Tester (1 minute) à Connectivity à Basic Functionality –MUX gain –DCU calibration –Current measurement à Pedestal –20% Cut à Noise –???% Cut à Gain (Single Point) –20% Cut

39. Slide 39Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Tests Prior to Arrival at FNAL/UCSB(2) Strasbourg à ????? CERN-Pitch adaptor bonding (~20 minutes) à Basic functionality à Pedestal –20% Cut à Noise –20% Cut à Gain (Single Point) –20% Cut à Capacitive pitch adaptor pulsing à Thermal cycle to –20 C –Repeat test à Warm to room temperature –Repeat test

40. Slide 40Module Testing Meeting Jan. 29, 2002CMS Module Testing Issues-Anthony Affolder Review Outline Current Testing Model Concerns About Model à Infant mortality à Common mode subtraction differences à System ground loops Suggested slight modification à Noise Requirements à Pedestal Requirements à Gain Scan Observations about: à LED test à Noise increase on chip edges Suggested testing model à CDF Module Burn-in experience à Rod burn-in concerns