The MLCC reliability pass criteria in Walsin Technology (Walsin) datasheets rest on one phrase. We counted “no remarkable damage” or “no remarkable defect” 103 times across 14 sheets. We found no definition of “remarkable” and no sample size anywhere. Eight different wordings do the same job, 149 uses in all.
Venatech Limited, an authorised Walsin distributor in Hong Kong, holds 28 Walsin datasheets. This post is written from the second half of them alphabetically: 12 MLCC approval sheets (VT, MG, HT, S2, S2-H, S3, SH, SG, TT, FT and the Mega Cap M and V sheets) and the two chip resistor sheets, MR and WR. Together they are 199 pages. Each was converted with pdftotext and searched for the words that decide whether a part passes. Every part number below is real, and the sheets that have no export rows say so.
How many times do Walsin’s datasheets say ‘no remarkable damage’?
103 times in 14 sheets. We counted every occurrence of “no remarkable damage” and “no remarkable defect” in the extracted text of each PDF. 101 sit on the 12 MLCC sheets, 2 on the two resistor sheets. The word “remarkable” appears 103 times in total, so every use of it is this one pass phrase. It is the appearance criterion after humidity, endurance, vibration, bending, soldering heat, temperature cycling and adhesive tests alike.
| Sheet | Pages | A real part from the series | “No remarkable …” | Other wording used for the same job | Match / mismatch against the MG sheet wording |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VT (VW80808) | 21 | none, no export rows | 14 | “no defects or abnormalities” 1 | Mismatch |
| MG | 23 | MG18X105K6R3 |
9 | none | reference |
| HT | 11 | HT15G2R2B500 |
9 | none | Match |
| S2 | 14 | S242B101K502 |
5 | “no mechanical damage” 1; “didn’t burn” 1 | Mismatch |
| S2-H | 12 | none, no export rows | 12 | “no mechanical damage” 1; “no defects or abnormalities” 1; “didn’t burn” 1 | Mismatch |
| S3 | 12 | none, no export rows | 5 | “no mechanical damage” 1; “didn’t burn” 1 | Mismatch |
| SH | 27 | SH31X106K160 |
9 | none | Match |
| SG | 16 | SG18B102K500 |
9 | none | Match |
| TT | 9 | TT15X105K6R3 |
9 | none | Match |
| FT | 9 | FT21B103M500 |
2 | “no damaged” 6 | Mismatch |
| Mega Cap M | 15 | none, no export rows | 9 | none | Match |
| Mega Cap V | 10 | none, no export rows | 9 | none | Match |
| MR (resistor) | 10 | MR06W1005FTL |
1 | “no visible damage” 14 | Mismatch |
| WR (resistor) | 10 | WR06W1005FTL |
1 | “no visible damage” 6; “no visual damaged” 1 | Mismatch |
| Total | 199 | 103 |
The column that matters is the last one. Match means the sheet uses no appearance wording beyond the MG phrase and the dielectric-strength clause every MLCC sheet shares. Six sheets match, MG is the reference, and seven add a wording the MG sheet does not use.
Does any Walsin sheet say what “remarkable” means?
No. We searched all 14 extracted texts for a definition: a crack length, a percentage of area, a magnification, an inspection standard for appearance. There are 103 uses of “remarkable” and 0 definitions of it. The nearest thing to a quantity sits beside it, not inside it: capacitance change, dissipation factor and insulation resistance limits are printed as numbers in the same Requirements cell. The appearance clause is the one part of the cell with no number.
The same job is done in eight differently worded ways. We counted all eight.
| Wording | Uses | Sheets | Where it appears | Match / mismatch against “no remarkable damage” |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No remarkable damage or defect | 103 | 14 | appearance after most tests | reference |
| No visible damage | 20 | 2 (MR 14, WR 6) | every resistor test | Mismatch — “visible”, not “remarkable” |
| No visual damaged | 1 | 1 (WR) | bending strength | Mismatch — a third adjective |
| No damaged | 6 | 1 (FT) | the six result tables | Mismatch — no noun at all |
| No mechanical damage | 3 | 3 (S2, S2-H, S3) | high temperature load | Mismatch |
| No evidence of damage or flash over | 11 | 11 | dielectric strength | Mismatch — a different test |
| No defects or abnormalities | 2 | 2 (VT, S2-H) | destructive physical analysis | Mismatch |
| Capacitor didn’t burn at all | 3 | 3 | passive flammability | Mismatch |
| Total | 149 |
A procurement specification that says “no remarkable damage per the manufacturer’s datasheet” has therefore cited a phrase that the resistor sheets do not use, the feed-through sheet replaces with a different one, and no sheet quantifies. The same pattern is why our count of termination adhesive strength found a force on every sheet and a measured breaking force on none.
Does any Walsin sheet state how many pieces were tested?
No. We searched the 14 texts for “sample”, “specimen”, “lot”, “batch”, “pcs”, “AQL”, “n =”, “quantity” and “number of”. “Sample” appears 8 times in 4 sheets, and none of the 8 gives a number of pieces. Three are the flammability test’s “volume sample: 21.56 mm3”, three are “each sample shall be subjected to 20 discharges”, and two are the MR sheet’s “bake the sample” and “steam the sample” in its solderability row.
The only counts the sheets print are stress counts: 20 discharges, three impulses, 24 impulses at most, 18 shocks, 36 vibration cycles. Those say how hard one piece is hit; “specimen” appears twice, both in the mechanical shock row, and means the piece under test. None says how many pieces were hit. “Unit: pieces” appears on packaging tables and is a reel quantity, nothing more.
That has a consequence for any reader who wants to compare a Walsin pass with another maker’s. A pass of “no remarkable damage” on a handful of pieces and on a full production lot reads identically in these sheets. The sample plan lives in a qualification report, and a qualification report is not in the documents we hold. For what AEC-Q200 does and does not certify, see what AEC-Q200 actually certifies.
Which Walsin sheets define a failure rate, and what is it?
Two of 14: the MG and SG sheets. Both carry a lifetime note beside the endurance table that defines “useful lifetime” as the time when the cumulative failure rate becomes 1%. The same note states that the lifetime data is “for reference only and not guaranteed”. It describes a general MLCC design life of around 10 years, extendable at 80% of rated voltage or less and at the maximum operating temperature minus 20 degrees Celsius or lower.
That is the only place in the 199 pages where a failure fraction appears at all, and it sits in a derating note, not in a reliability test. The other 12 sheets state no failure fraction, no acceptance number and no confidence level. The MG sheet’s data is the series we cover in automotive MLCC MT versus MG; the 788 MG export rows carry no lifetime figure of their own.
Do the sheets agree on the room conditions the tests run in?
Not across makers’ product lines. We read the standard-conditions line of each sheet. Eleven of 12 MLCC sheets print “room condition” as 15 to 35 degrees Celsius, 25 to 75% relative humidity and 86 to 106 kPa; the S2-H sheet prints none. Both resistor sheets print 45 to 75% relative humidity. Nine MLCC sheets add a second band, 30 to 70% relative humidity, for the electrical measurement itself.
So four humidity bands sit in this half of the corpus: 25 to 75% for MLCC room condition, 30 to 70% for MLCC measurement, 45 to 75% for resistors, and 20 to 70% for storage. They are all legitimate for their own purpose. They are also the reason a number measured in one lab and quoted from a sheet can differ from the number your incoming inspection records, and why a pass that depends on appearance after a humidity soak deserves the stated ambient.
What should you ask for before accepting a pass?
Ask for four things, in this order. The sample size and the acceptance number. The inspection method for appearance: magnification and who judged. The revision of the test method cited. And the report itself, by part number. None of the four is in the 199 pages we read.
Check the part you intend to buy against the sheet that governs it. Walsin’s MG, SH, SG, HT, TT, FT and S2 series appear in the parametric export; VT, S2-H, S3, M and V do not, so the free cross-reference tool cannot offer them. We hold 28 Walsin datasheets, 451 pages, and send the one covering your part on request. Stock in Hong Kong is on the ready stock page: 1,125 part numbers as at 23 September 2026, a dated snapshot and not a live feed. Capacitors sit on the MLCC page. Our earlier count of the resistor reliability test lists found WR lists 12 and MR 16.
The short version
“No remarkable damage” or “no remarkable defect” appears 103 times in 14 Walsin sheets and is defined in none. Eight wordings do the same job, 149 uses in all, and seven of 14 sheets add a wording the MG sheet does not use. “Sample” appears 8 times and never as a count of pieces. Two sheets, MG and SG, define a 1% cumulative failure rate, and call it reference only. Eleven of 12 MLCC sheets print their ambient conditions; S2-H prints none; the resistor sheets print a different humidity band. We counted all of it from the PDFs, and we have not seen this counted anywhere. Qualification stays with you. Confirm against both datasheets and qualify in your own circuit.
Send us the pass clause from your specification and the part number it governs, and we will tell you which Walsin sheet wording it matches. And a question back: if “remarkable” is a number in your incoming inspection plan, what is it?
Frequently asked questions
How often do Walsin datasheets say no remarkable damage?
We counted 103 uses of no remarkable damage or no remarkable defect across 14 Walsin datasheets, 12 for MLCC and 2 for chip resistors. 101 sit on the MLCC sheets and 2 on the resistor sheets. We found no definition of remarkable and no quantity attached to it in any of the 14.
Does any Walsin datasheet state a sample size for its reliability tests?
No. We searched 14 datasheets for sample, specimen, lot, AQL and quantity. The word sample appears 8 times in 4 sheets and never as a count of pieces. The only counts printed are stress counts such as 20 discharges and 18 shocks. The sample plan is not in the documents we hold.
Do the Walsin resistor sheets use the same pass wording as the MLCC sheets?
No. The MR sheet uses no visible damage 14 times and no remarkable damage once. The WR sheet uses no visible damage 6 times, no visual damaged once and no remarkable damage once. The MLCC sheets use no remarkable damage on 12 of 12 sheets, with the feed-through sheet adding a second phrase, no damaged.
Which Walsin sheets define a failure rate?
Two of 14, the MG and SG sheets. Each defines useful lifetime as the time when cumulative failure rate becomes 1 percent, and states the data is for reference only and not guaranteed. The other 12 sheets state no failure fraction, no acceptance number and no confidence level for any reliability test.
Do all Walsin MLCC datasheets state the same room conditions?
Eleven of 12 print 15 to 35 degrees Celsius, 25 to 75 percent relative humidity and 86 to 106 kilopascals. The S2-H sheet prints no room condition. Nine sheets also print 30 to 70 percent relative humidity for the electrical measurement. Both resistor sheets print 45 to 75 percent.
Can the cross-reference tool show every series in these sheets?
No. The parametric export holds rows for MG, SH, SG, HT, TT, FT and S2, and none for VT, S2-H, S3 and the Mega Cap M and V series. The tool cannot offer a series with no rows. We hold all of the datasheets and send the relevant one on request.