LHCb VELO Production Visit November 9 th 2005 Introduction to staff Status Schedule.
-
Upload
adam-kennedy -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of LHCb VELO Production Visit November 9 th 2005 Introduction to staff Status Schedule.
LHCb VELO ProductionVisit November 9th 2005
Introduction to staffStatusSchedule
Production Phase Staff
Status
• EDR in April’ 05• Target Production Readiness Dec ’05
– Green light for the release of physics grade components by the collaboration
• Delivery of 42 modules (84 sensors)– 20 for system test April ’05– 42 by June ’05 (or earlier)– Rates of delivery to be discussed later
Status
• Preparing for production of (PRR)– 3 mechanicals (fully functional barring
sensors)– 3 electrical (fully functional but with
poorest sensors)
Major issues at EDR
• Pitch adaptors• Twisted hybrids at pre-production
phase– These two problems alone have cost ~ 6
months
• Jigs and tooling– Majority complete/modified
• Vacuum Performance of Sensors– OK
Major post EDR issues
• High current mode of sensor during testing• Reliability of K&S 8090
– Front end bonding machine– New contract gives us confidence
• Pitch Adaptors• Hybrid circuit testing
– Commericial and in house• Stress relief of cables
– Clamp production proving difficult• Cable quality not good enough for
production– Tied to one company at the moment
In preparation for PRR
• Assembly robot deployment• Paddle-hybrid gluing jig completion• Programming of glue robot
PRR will require
• Non-artisinale production of modules• Adherance to tight mechanical
tolerances• Electrical integrity• Proof that yield is adequate
Visit Schedule 9th November• 9:30 -11:00 Tour of assembly area
– Parts and metrology: Phil Turner– Gluing and bonding: Mark Whitley– Assembly and testing: John Carroll
• 11:00-11:30 Tea (3rd floor)• 11:30-12:30 Tour of workshop
– Carbon Fibre and Mechanics: Peter Cooke• 12:30-13:30 Lunch (3rd floor) all invited• 13:30-14:00 QA and software (VC rm)• 14:00-15:00 Project Review• 15:00-15:30 Resource Meeting• 15:30-16:00 Tea/Coffee• 16:00-16:15 Feedback (rm 337)
Project Review
9 November
Project Review
Project Plan
• PRR plan Shortcut to PRR.lnk
Logistics• Components
– Feet– Bases– Paddles– TPG(100%)– CF(100%
• Substrates– 75% yield
• Hybrids– Yield unknown– Should have 50-60 physics
grade• Sensors
– 95% yield -> replacement• Pitch Adaptors
– 60% received– 80% yeild
• Handling Frames– 20 off– 6 available
• Cables– Major problem
• Clamps– Manufacturing problem
• Transport boxes– Syracuse
Sensor Status• Received 42/142 ~ 30%
– Contracted delivery at 15/month= 7 months to completion (June ’06)
– Sufficient for VELO completion in 4 months (March ’06)
– Laser cutting will now be the bottleneck
• Have 18 sensors for physics– 4 under test– 6 high current behaviour but possibly usable– 14 used/irradiated/rejected/damaged/(mia)
• Our QA deselects ~5% of delivery. These are replaced.
Sensor ProductionDATE: 31st OCTOBER 2005
DOUBLE-METAL LHC-b VELO DETECTOR TRACKINGOVERALL WAFER COUNT 200 um PHI 200 um R 300 um PHI 300 um R MECH R MECH PHI
PROCESS STAGE1 1200 DEG.C OXYGENATION 20 302 P-SPRAY3 FIELD OXIDATION 4 1ST/2ND DIFF IMAGING 5 CAPACITOR THIN OXIDE 20 306 FRONT/BACK ION IMPLANTATION7 ISOLATION IMAGING (NN+ OHMIC)8 ISOLATION IMPLANT (NN+ OHMIC)9 POLYSILICON DEPOSITION (NN+)
10 POLYSILICON IMPLANTATION 11 SILOX DEPOSITION (RES)12 CON-P IMAGING (RES) 13 CON-P IMPLANTATION 14 RESISTOR IMAGING (NN+ OHMIC) 15 IMPLANTATION ANNEAL (900) 16 PE-CVD DEPOSITION17 CON-S IMAGING18 WAFER CLEAN/P-ETCH19 1 ST METAL DEPOSITION (P+N) 29 47 20 1 ST METAL IMAGING/ETCHING21 2 ND METAL DEPOSITION (NN+)22 2 ND METAL IMAGING/ETCHING23 NN+ D/M DIELECTRIC (4 UM)24 NN+ VIAL HOLE IMAGING/ETCH 25 N-MET2 (D/M OVERLAY)26 N-MET2 METAL IMAGE/ETCH27 D/M SCAN TESTING28 SILOX PASSIVATION29 LASER CUTTING (WAFERS) 1 530 WAFER CLEANING (FINAL) 31 FINAL TESTING (CHIPS) 5 3
FINISHED MECHANICAL CHIPS MSL LASER CUTTOTAL WAFERS IN SYSTEM 70 112
32 DELIVERED DEVICES
PHI WAFER = 3 OFF DEVICES CONTRACT NUMBER = JW1477R WAFER = 2 OFF DEVICES
Risks
• Sensor manufacturer deliver
• Cables• Clamps• Hybrids• Assembly/twist
methodology failure
Realism
• Do we think the plan is “realistic”• Yes
– Depends on delivery not slipping and no unforeseen disasters
Summary
• All components and methodologies have been designed
• Delivery of sensors still of concern