1 / 7

Commissioning Progress and Performance Analysis of Modules - HBD Meeting, February 20, 2006

In the HBD commissioning meeting held on February 20, 2006, several key updates were discussed regarding the performance of various modules. The procedures implemented recently have proven effective, with detailed logs providing valuable insights into the data. It was emphasized that module conditioning must be completed swiftly, and all relevant information should be compiled. Calibration and testing showed varying stability across different GEM modules, with some experiencing multiple trips at high voltages, which require urgent attention. Improvements are essential for optimal performance.

pepin
Télécharger la présentation

Commissioning Progress and Performance Analysis of Modules - HBD Meeting, February 20, 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HBD HV Commissioning Itzhak Tserruya, HBD meeting, February 20, 2006

  2. A few comments • The procedure followed during the last days is working very well. • The detailed logs are extremely useful for a real assessment of the data. • We should complete this module by module conditioning as soon as possible. • We need to collect together all information relevant to a given module. • We should take pedestals and perform pulser calibration.

  3. Modules conditioned so far EN0 EN1 EN2 EN3 EN4 EN5 14/2 13/2 16/2 18/2 18/2 18/2 ES0 ES1 ES2 ES3 ES4 ES5 15/2 19/2 19/2 WN0 WN1 WN2 WN3 WN4 WN5 19/2 16/2 14/2 18/2 18/2 WS0 WS1 WS2 WS3 WS4 WS5 15/2 19/2 13/2 18/2 13/2: EN1, WS4 14/2: EN0, WN2 15/2: ES0, WS0 16/2: EN2, WN1 17/2 18/2: EN3, EN4, EN5, WS4, WN3, WN5 19/2: ES1, ES5, WS3,WN0

  4. WN5 (18/2) • No trip in ramping up to 3600 V • 4h at 3600 V: 0 trip • present configuration (TMB): 10 10 10 • Bertan test: Top: 6microamp at 520V --> top total impedance 86.7M Middle and bottom GEMs normal. • looking at the history since the GEM by GEM Bertan tests, WN5 has been very stable, drawing a current of about dI = 0.3% at 3000 V. This current is consistent with the 86.7M total impedance. • At 3600 V the M and B GEMs are at 483.9V. But the top GEM is at 439.7V • I think this is a good module. We need to replace the 10M of the top GEM by an appropriate resistor ( ~11.3M) to restore the normal voltage across the top GEM.

  5. EN4 (18/2) • 3600 V: 3 trips in 25 minutes • 3550 V: 4 trips in 40 minutes • 3500 V: 3 trips in 25 minutes • 3450 V: 3 trips in 50 minutes • present configuration (TMB) 20 10 10. • Bertan test: Top: 18microamp at 520V --> total impedance 28.9MOhm • Midle and Bottom GEMs normal. • A 20MOhm has ben installed in the Top GEM (apparently after the Bertan test?) • Looking at the history since the GEMby GEM Bertan tests, EN4 has been very stable, drawing a current of about dI = -0.6% at 3000 V. With an impedance of 28.9MOhm we would expect dI = -0.8%. • At 3600 V the M and B GEMs are at 483.9V. If we use the impedance of 28.9MOhm, the top GEM is at 558 V !! This could explain the multiple trips. I think we should avoid negative currents. They result in over-voltages on the GEMs

  6. EN4 (18/2) • 3600 V: 3 trips in 25 minutes • 3550 V: 4 trips in 40 minutes • 3500 V: 3 trips in 25 minutes • 3450 V: 3 trips in 50 minutes • present configuration (TMB) 20 10 10. • Bertan test: Top: 18microamp at 520V --> total impedance 28.9MOhm • Midle and Bottom GEMs normal. • A 20MOhm has ben installed in the Top GEM (apparently after the Bertan test?) • Looking at the history since the GEMby GEM Bertan tests, EN4 has been very stable, drawing a current of about dI = -0.6% at 3000 V. With an impedance of 28.9MOhm we would expect dI = -0.8%. • At 3600 V the M and B GEMs are at 483.9V. If we use the impedance of 28.9MOhm, the top GEM is at 558 V !! This could explain the multiple trips. I think we should avoid negative currents. They result in over-voltages on the GEMs

  7. ES1 (12/2) • 3600 V: 1 trip in about 5.5 h (could have been induced by EN4 that draws negative current and was taken to 3550 V a few minutes before the trip) • present configuration (TMB) 10 10 10. • Bertan test: Top: 5 microamp at 520V --> total impedance 104MOhm • Midle and Bottom GEMs normal • Looking at the history since the GEMby GEM Bertan tests, ES1 has not been very stable.

More Related