Control Module production M. Circella, ANTARES-SC meeting, CPPM April 2004 1/39 Summary: LCM...

Control Module production M. Circella, ANTARES-SC meeting, CPPM April 20041/39

Summary:• LCM integration & PRR

(in particular: integration rehearsal of last week)• Preparation for xCM production

Status of Control Module integration


It consists of the following processes:

Control Module production

Reception

Storage

Integration

Test

Packing (+storage)

Component level

(transportation)

(transportation)

Module level


Control Module production: scenario

All activities under definition based on the following considerations:

• Time constraints (schedule request: one working LCM produced in two days)

• Manpower needs (one person?)

• Safety requirements: power & grounding during functional tests, ESD protection, fibre handling

• Quality Control approach: detailed procedure for each operation, development of tools

• Traceability & test needs

Target: Full system defined and working in time for the construction of the MILOM modules (according to the current schedule: by end of June 2004)

LCM integration test for LCM PRR: necessary step to check the overall design of the module from the integration point of view and in particular to spot out all possible (minor) modifications to the module components before the mass productions start


LCM integration tests for PRR

• First test performed in week 12 (March): report available at

http://www.ba.infn.it/~circella/LCM/LCM_int_first_report.pdf

• Complete rehearsal of the integration performed in week 16 (last week): procedure and report available at

http://www.ba.infn.it/~circella/LCM/LCM_integration_test_prr_10.pdf

http://www.ba.infn.it/~circella/LCM/LCM_int_second_report.pdf

Conclusion after both tests:

***NOT READY***

(but not so far away from readiness…)


LCM PRR integration test reportDifficulties concerned:

1. Missing or wrong specifications on screw sizes, screwing torque, thread locker decisions made on the site

2. Not all components available: the nylon ring and the 1 M resistor for connection to the flange, a few screws, the plastic tubes and their brackets were missing

spare parts (most from the PSL) recycled or adapted

3. Not all boards in final configuration:

- ‘glue’ problem on the backplane

- LCM_CLOCK without fibre tray

- cooling plates of the crate out of specifications?

not possible to test the final LCM configuration

4. Integration supports not available

not possible to test the final procedure

Most serious problem: electrical contact between crate and titanium (flange + tube)


Module integration (summary)

0. (Get all components and tools at hand)

1. Assemble a complete module before making any tests

2. Power and optical margin test: check that the voltage and current values are acceptable when powering up the module with a test board (SUMO) inserted between the power box and the crate and that the optical transmission work with proper attenuators inserted along on the optical fibres. Then remove the SUMO and mount the power box on the module

3. Functional test


1. assemble the crate (backplane included), and fix the gas venting tube to it

Option: fix the fibre spiral tube as well!

crate

(0. Get all proper components and tools at hand)

Result step 0: not all components available (+ a few specification errors)

Comments: • no supports needed for this step• it is not convenient (or possible?) to mount the spiral tube at this step

LCM integration procedure (rehearsal of)


LCM integration test (details)Result step 1: • backplane: excess of glue on coaxial cables, coaxial cables not labelled • ground cables from backplane: what is the ideal position? • insertion of the coaxial cables in the trays of the backplane holders difficult• brackets for the plastic tubes can not be mounted without modifying the crate

possible modifications to the crate and backplane


2. Fix the crate to the titanium flange

flange crate

Comments: • preferred orientation is horizontal (supports needed)• no (more) alignment holes in the flange and couronne 1



Result step 2: • difficult alignment of flange and crate (rehearsal made with crate vertical due to missing supports)• difficult insertion of the kapton ring • missing 1 M resistor• wrong screws used for the resistor (due to missing specifications)• difficult to get crate and flange isolated (due to flange’s washers? plastic inserts of the screws?)

• improve documentation• develop integration supports• fix the nylon rings to the crate?• check again all screws with torque specifications• modifications to flange or crate?



3. …then the (flange+crate) block is fixed on its support…

(old version support)

Comment: support not available during this test


4. …the crate is connected to the power box through a power supply test board (SUMO: Supply Monitor)

SUMO test board

Power box

5. ...then we insert the boards one at a time

Comment: SUMO board not used during the test



Result step 5: • fibre spiral tube not initially fixed to crate. It needs to be fixed to the table and elongated up to 70-80 cm • wrong screws used for DAQ and CLOCK cooling bases (due to missing specifications)

• improve documentation• develop integration supports


6. …when all boards are inserted we fix the fibre spiral tube to the crate, then we make all connections to the test bench (power, fibres, flange connectors) and make the power and optical power margin tests

SUMO test board

Power box

Option: we mount at least one of the cooling plates before the power+optical power margin and/or the functional tests

Comment: step 6 not made during the rehearsal



7. …remove the SUMO board and fix the power box to the crate

8. functional tests!!


Comment: steps 7-8 not made during the rehearsal


9. …(assuming the test is ok) prepare for shipping

(old version LCM)



What to do at the line integration site

10. If necessary, remove the protection from the bottom flange

11. Install/replace the o-rings of the bottom flange

12. Install the titanium cylinder and mount the container on the line

Comment: only step 12 relevant for this rehearsal

Result step 12: contact between crate and titanium container! Solved by putting kapton tape on the short edges of the cooling plates


General formula for traceability:PBSNumber/VersionNumber.SerialNumber

(rule: one individual PBS number used to identify only components which are always completely interchangeable)

PBS and bar-code

Is this THE rule? Are there exceptions? Notes added after the meeting: • the rule above is no longer endorsed by the Steering Committee (therefore the discussion of page 22 needs to be updated)• the traceability format remains valid, with the SerialNumber to be a unique number for ONE object of a given PBS (i.e., the SerialNumber increases independently of the VersionNumber)


There are 3 kinds of LCM’s (leaving aside the MILOM and IL needs):(a) LCM connected to 3 OM’s(b) LCM connected to 3 OM’s and a LED beacon(c) LCM connected to 3 OM’s and an acoustic receiver (d) LCM connected to sound velocimeter/CTD

LCM configurations

Proposal - let us define a ‘version number’ to discriminate among them:1 for LCM (a)2 for LCM (b)3 for LCM (c)4 for LCM (d)(5, 6, ... for future needs – 0 for the ‘no-version’ option)

Note: there is indeed one PBS number for all LCM’s and MLCM’s


There are 2 kinds of MLCM’s (leaving aside the MILOM and IL needs):

(a) MLCM connected to 3 OM’s

(b) MLCM connected to 3 OM’s and a LED beacon

MLCM configurations

Proposal - let us define a ‘version number’ to discriminate among them:1 for MLCM (a)2 for MLCM (b)(3, 4, 5, ... for future needs – 0 for the ‘no-version’ option) Note: there is indeed one PBS number for all LCM’s

and MLCM’s (so the LCM and MLCM versions should be enumerated together)


There are 2 kinds of SCM’s (leaving aside the MILOM and IL needs):

(a) SCM connected to acoustic TX/RX, pressure sensor and sound velocimeter

(b) SCM connected to the instruments in (a) + a laser beacon

SCM configurations

Proposal - let us define a ‘version number’ to discriminate among them:1 for SCM (a)2 for SCM (b)(3, 4, 5, ... for future needs – 0 for the ‘no-version’ option)


Suggested changes:

a) crates: the current PBS has only 2.1.01 LCM_CRATE => we would need two PBS numbers for LCM_CRATE and MLCM_CRATE

b) backplanes: the current PBS has only 2.1.02 LCM_BACK and 2.2.02 SCM_BACK => we would need three numbers for LCM_BACK-1 (for LCM-V1 and LCM-V3), LCM_BACK-2 (for LCM-V2), and LCM_BACK-3 (for LCM-V4); 2 numbers for MLCM_BACK-1 (for MLCM-V1) and MLCM_BACK-2 (for MLCM-V2); and 2 for SCM_BACK-1 (for SCM-V1) and SCM_BACK-2 (for SCM-V2). Then, we will add more numbers if/when needed

c) LCM flange: the current PBS has only 1.3.2 LCM_CONTAINER => we would need three different numbers for the different flanges (for the three LCM configurations). Should we also introduce different PBS numbers for the flanges and the other parts of the containers, as for the SCM case?

d) LCM_DAQ/SC: the current PBS has only 2.1.17 LCM_DAQ/SC => we would need three different numbers for MLCM_DAQ/SC, LCM_DAQ/SC and SCM_DAQ/SC

e) MLCM_DWDM: the current PBS has only 2.1.16 MLCM_DWDM => we would need EITHER 5 different PBS numbers OR the version number used to specify the different wavelengths (or are there other options?)

f) SCM_REP: the current PBS has only 2.2.04 SC_REP => we would need two different numbers for SCM_REP1 (serving 3 sectors) and SCM_REP2 (serving 2 sectors)

g) LPB: the current PBS has only 2.2.11 POWER_BOX. It is indeed the same object used inside the LCM/MLCM/SCM, but in case of the xLCM it will be powered at +380 V, in the SCM it needs to be powered at +48V: the difference is made by the connector => shall we give a PBS number to the connector and its cable?

[h) should we also worry about the different SCM flanges?]

PBS updates

Further suggestion: double-check all labels and avoid using numbers in labels when not strictly needed (so: LCM_BIDICON => MLCM_BIDICON ; SCM_WDM1 => SCM_WDM ; SCM_BACK1 => SCM_BACK-1/SCM_BACK-2 ;)

See

not

es o

n pa

ges

18, 1

9, 2

0


• LCM-V1 (configuration with just 3 OM’s) is composed of:- 1 LCM_CRATE PBS-2.1.1 (*)- 1 LCM_BACK-1 PBS-2.1.2 (*)- 1 POWER_BOX PBS-2.1.11 (*)- 1 titanium flange PBS-1.3.2 (*) [the rest of the container will be installed at the level of line integration] - 1 COMPASS_MB PBS-2.1.3- 3 ARS_MB PBS-2.1.4- 1 LCM_DAQ/SC PBS-2.1.17 (*)- 1 LCM_CLOCK PBS-2.1.7

LCM main components

Then,• LCM-V3 (configuration with 3 OM’s and an acoustic receiver) comprises in addition:

- 1 ACOUST_RX_PREAMP PBS-2.1.8- 1 ACOUST_RX_DSP PBS-2.1.9- 1 ACOUST_RX_CPU PBS-2.1.10

• LCM-V2 (configuration with 3 OM’s and a LED beacon) comprises in addition: - a fourth ARS_MB PBS-2.1.4 (but we have to replace LCM_BACK-1 with LCM_BACK-2)

• for LCM-V4 LCM_BACK-1 should be replaced with LCM_BACK-3)[Beware: the flange is different for each configuration]

Not

e: P

BS

-rel

ated

issu

es e

xist

for

item

s m

ark

ed (

*)


• MLCM-V1 (configuration with just 3 OM’s) is composed of:- 1 MLCM_CRATE PBS-2.1.1 (*)- 1 MLCM_BACK-1 PBS-2.1.2 (*)- 1 POWER_BOX PBS-2.1.11 (*)- 1 titanium flange PBS-1.3.2 (*) [the rest of the container will be installed at the level of line integration] - 1 COMPASS_MB PBS-2.1.3- 3 ARS_MB PBS-2.1.4- 1 MLCM_DAQ/SC PBS-2.1.17 (*)- 1 LCM_CLOCK PBS-2.1.7- 1 MLCM_DWDM PBS-2.1.16 (*)- 1 MLCM_SWITCH PBS-2.1.18- 1 (M)LCM_BIDICON PBS-2.1.05

MLCM main components

Then,• MLCM-V2 (configuration with 3 OM’s and a LED beacon) comprises in addition:

- a fourth ARS_MB PBS-2.1.4 (but we have to replace MLCM_BACK-1 with MLCM_BACK-2)[Beware: the flange is different for the two configurations]

Note: PBS-related issues exist for items marked (*)


• SCM-V1 (configuration without a laser beacon) is composed of:- 1 SCM_CRATE PBS-2.2.01- 1 SCM_BACK-1 PBS-2.2.02 (*)- 1 POWER_BOX PBS-2.1.11 (*)- 1 titanium flange PBS-1.2.6.2 (*) - 1 COMPASS_MB PBS-2.1.3- 1 SCM_DAQ/SC PBS-2.1.17 (*)- 1 SCM_CLOCK PBS-2.2.05- 1 SCM_WDM PBS-2.2.03 (*)- 1 SCM_REP1 + 1 SCM_REP2 PBS-2.2.04 (*)- 1 SCM_DWDM PBS-2.2.16- 1 ACOUST_RXTX_EM PBS-2.2.07- 1 ACOUST_RXTX_PREAMP PBS-2.2.08- 1 ACOUST_RXTX_DSP2 PBS-2.2.09- 1 ACOUST_RXTX_DSP1 PBS-2.2.10- 1 ACOUST_RXTX_CPU PBS-2.2.11- 1 ACOUST_RXTX_POW PBS-2.2.12

SCM main components

Then,• SCM-V2 (configuration with a laser beacon) comprises in addition:

- 1 ARS_MB PBS-2.1.4 (but we have to replace SCM_BACK-1 with SCM_BACK-2)[Beware: the flange is different for the two configurations]

Not

e: P

BS

-rel

ated

issu

es e

xist

for

item

s m

ark

ed (

*)


For integration of each xCM the following components are also needed:1. small parts for the crate assembly, namely: 1.1 the screws to fix couronne 1 to the titanium flange;1.2 the plastic inserts for these screws;1.3 the nylon rings to be put between couronne 1 and the flange for

LCM/MLCM;1.4 the screws to fix the LPB to couronne 2; 1.5 the mini-screws to mount the backplane into its support bars;1.6 the bolts to fix the ground connections from the backplane to the crate;1.7 the screws to fix the backplane to couronne 21.8 the brackets to install the two plastic tubes (with screws+washers);1.9 the screws for the cooling bases of LCM_DAQ/SC and LCM_CLOCK

(LCM/MLCM/SCM), MLCM_DWDM and MLCM_SWITCH (MLCM), SCM_DWDM and SCM_WDM (SCM)

Control Module minor components (1)


Then we need also:2. the 1 MΩ resistor to be installed between the crate and the flange for

LCM/MLCM (with its screws)

3. the LPB connector terminated by the wires to be soldered to the backplane (with its screws)

4. the HV cable for the LPB (with the screws for the connector)

5. the gas venting tube and the fibre spiral tube

6. the thread locker(s)

7. the thermal gel for the cooling plates

Control Module minor components (2)


Very strong recommendation:

Every single board should arrive to the xCM integration site ready to be integrated in a Control Module

It implies that at the xCM integration sites there will be:

- no modifications to any board- no wire or component soldering- no check of board configuration

Component reception: assumptions

implications for component delivery to the integration sites

traceability implications (PBS)


We expect that:

- the titanium flange arrives with all cables terminated with the connectors to plug to the backplane; it should have no o-ring (or, at least, no ‘final’ o-ring) and possibly it should be provided with proper protections for the connectors and the inner surface

- the backplanes arrive equipped with all components properly installed (as needed!), including the power wires and the connector to plug to the LPB, the coaxials and any other cable

- the LPB arrives equipped with its HV connector and wires

- each board arrives exactly in the configuration it should be (i.e., as identified by its traceability label: PBSNumber/VersionNumber.SerialNumber)

- for all components we expect to receive an accompanying test report and to be able to trace the product history through the bar code label (we will use it as well to update the history of the integrated modules)

- ... (this list will be updated according to the integration test results)

Implications for component delivery to the xCM integration sites


Therefore we need that:

- each component is accompanied by a proper test report (= a PBS compliance certificate)

- traceability is possible through the bar code label

Component reception at the xCM integration site

Actions upon reception:

- visually inspect the components

- check the accompanying documentation

- interact with the database to update the product history


- ‘Standard’ laboratory conditions needed for storage and integration- ESD protection required for all sensitive components (i.e., electronics boards and LPB) at all times- storage room needs under evaluation (most serious requirement from mechanical pieces)

Component storage at the xCM integration site


Packing (and delivery)

• Transportation logistics provided by IN2P3 “Cellule Logistique”

• Flange transportation box will be used for module delivery


• In progress (due for xCM PRR):– PBS list

– component configuration (namely, define possible changes)

– integration procedure

– integration supports and tools (all or just what is essential?)

– documentation

Work in progress...

Target: complete rehearsal has to be made in time for LCM PRR


• To be done (due for end June for LCM):– definition of intermediate (power, optical power margin) tests

– transportation boxes for components and modules

– storage containers/conditions

– bar code traceability (requires reader and software)

– complete integration table

– define and implement test benches!

– define test scenario (including: failure modes, module repair line)

– documentation

Work to be done...


• What’s critical:– Quality Control directives needed (in time for PRR?)

– Test bench status unsatisfactory (needed for production)

– the Pisa group can contribute more

– no ‘MLCM training’ currently possible

– possible conflict in Bari for finalization of the SCM and MLCM test benches

Critical items...


• Should the LCM PRR wait to have the full Quality Control system implemented?

• Is the integration of the MILOM LCM’s really needed in July? (SCM and MLCM due in September)

• Can we enable the Pisa group to work on the module integration and on the development of the test bench at Pisa? (needed: onshore clock system, ethernet fibre connection, a complete LCM)

Implications


• General definition essentially done• Implementation delay due to unexpected problem with the ethernet link• Implementation essentially stopped because:

- acoustics system control is not possible with the DAQ/SC software- lack of detailed documentation on other tests

• Current status of the test bench: - it manages SC and clock communications with the SCM- it can drive the SCHarness through the state machine- it can query and decode SC data

all in an integrated Labview software

SCM test bench development(ongoing work at Bari)


• General definition started

• Getting the LCM to acquire data was a tough job, due to poor documentation

• Current status of the test bench:

- it manages DAQ/SC and clock communications with the LCM

- it can drive the DAQ/SCHarnesses through their state machines

- it can query and decode SC data

- it can drive data acquisitions with emulated signals from a pulser

all in an integrated Labview software

LCM test bench development(ongoing work at Catania and Pisa)


• Definition essentially linked to the LCM case (except for the MLCM-LCM communications and ethernet switching)

• Implementation should inherit both from the SCM and LCM test benches (not yet defined what to inherit from which test bench...)

• Hardware for the MLCM-LCM ethernet connections purchased but not yet integrated

MLCM test bench development

Control Module production M. Circella, ANTARES-SC meeting, CPPM April 2004 1/39 Summary: LCM...

Documents

Transcript of Control Module production M. Circella, ANTARES-SC meeting, CPPM April 2004 1/39 Summary: LCM...