1. Slide 1Electrical Testing at UCSB -Anthony AffolderDOE review, January 20, 2004 Module Testing at UCSB: Simulated Production 11-04 Derek Barge On behalf of the UCSB testing group

2. Slide 2Electrical Testing at UCSB -Anthony AffolderDOE review, January 20, 2004 Purpose To show a testing rate of 30 modules per day can be comfortably sustained at UCSB To identify potential problems & bottlenecks: à ARCS Software (requests for Aachen) à ARCS Software configuration à Mechanics & Logistics à Test Checklists & data management à Test automated uploading to TrackerDB à Crowding in the Lab

3. Slide 3Electrical Testing at UCSB -Anthony AffolderDOE review, January 20, 2004 Testing Rates 30 Modules Tested à 15 OB2, 9 OB1, 6 Stereo OB2 à Simulated worst case scenario: –Artificially high fault rate –Mixed module types (OB1 & OB2) Tests & Rates à A Total of 36 tests were performed (4 repairs, 1 unbiased, 1 with wrong cuts) à Testing complete in 8 hours, 13 man hours à 2.75 tests per man hour à 4.5 tests per hour !!! à 3.75 modules finished per hour, 2.3 per man hour à Average test takes 26 minutes

4. Slide 4Electrical Testing at UCSB -Anthony AffolderDOE review, January 20, 2004 Testing Results Grading: à 28 Grade A à 0 Grade B à 2 Grade C (both failed) 26/30 Modules processed (passed or failed) on first test à 24/26 passed à 2/26 failed –1 CMN –1 with 11 opens due to problems bonding & 3 noisy channels 4/30 Modules needed repairs à 6063: 2 expected pinholes, 1 unexpected open à 6075: 1 pinhole, 1 expected short, 1 unexpected short, 2 expected noisy à 6077: 3 expected pinholes, 1 unexpected pinhole, 1 unexpected open, 2 noisy à 6079: 2 expected pinholes

5. Slide 5Electrical Testing at UCSB -Anthony AffolderDOE review, January 20, 2004 Problems Encountered Mechanics & Logistics à Solder broke on adapter card, took ~ 20 min to fix à DB relay down for 15 minutes, switched relay à Flying wires need to be taped down to avoid damage Software & Data à Minor software improvements from Aachen –Should gain ~ 1 min per test and reduced bad test rate à False flag rate –1 test in 1 mode falsely flagged good channel as a likely 1SO à Incomplete bonding data –Some unexpected opens were encountered, channels that could not be bonded were not entered in the DB. This was fixed immediately.

6. Slide 6Electrical Testing at UCSB -Anthony AffolderDOE review, January 20, 2004 Success Stories Data Management à New version of Module Checklist worked well –3 minor bugs discovered, mostly aesthetic –More automation than previous version; only bad channels need to be entered à Automatic uploading of module data via XML is implemented –Half of the XML files uploaded successfully on first try –Other half failed due to incorrect tool id for one stand, fixed and uploaded fine Crowding in the Clean room à Clean room was not overcrowded à Good communication between testing stations

7. Slide 7Electrical Testing at UCSB -Anthony AffolderDOE review, January 20, 2004 Conclusions 30 modules per day is sustainable à Could potentially test 36 PERFECT modules in a day à Otherwise testing rate depends on rate of modules needing repair –Simulated repair rate of 4/30 in this excercise =.13 –ST qualification repair rate was ~ 1/10 =.1 –HPK: about 1/30 modules have an expected fault, unexpected fault rate expected to be even lower for HPK à Performace should improve with HPK silicon