Calcined Clay Cement Admixture Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- 42 families from one leader, against a long tail of 50 other assignees each holding far fewer filings — the field is not evenly contested.
- Filings grew 20% from 2021 to 2024, the last year with a complete publication picture, showing sustained rather than early-stage interest.
- C04B cement classes cover 59.8% of records, but over a third also carry C09K materials classes, showing most claims sit at the cement-chemistry boundary, not purely in polymer science.
Filing growth compares 2021 (5 records) with 2024 (6) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field.
What this landscape covers
Calcined clay and limestone-calcined-clay cement (LC3) systems change the water demand, rheology and hydration kinetics of a blended binder relative to ordinary Portland cement. Admixture chemistries — superplasticizers, workability-retention agents, sacrificial polymers and hydration accelerators — are the mechanism by which formulators compensate for the higher water demand of calcined clay without giving up strength development or slump life. This dataset tracks 107 published patent families addressing that compensation problem, filed against a search string built around calcined clay cement, limestone calcined clay, polycarboxylate superplasticizers and the specific technical symptoms (dosage increase, clay water demand, hydration acceleration, workability retention) that these admixtures are designed to fix.
The scope spans cement and refractory chemistry (C04B), general-purpose materials (C09K), and polymer additive and synthesis classes (C08K, C08F, C08L, C08G, C08H), plus a smaller cluster in well-drilling (E21B) where similar sacrificial-agent chemistry recurs in oilfield cementing. Receiving-office activity concentrates in China, the United States, Australia, the WIPO PCT route, Canada and the United Kingdom.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 107-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which technical classes the claims actually sit in.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Annual filings ran from 3 in 2017 to a peak of 6 in 2024, with 2021-2024 up 20%. 2025 and 2026 counts will keep rising as publication catches up with the roughly 18-month filing-to-publication lag, so treat the most recent two years as a floor, not a ceiling.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
C04B (cement and refractories) appears in 59.8% of the 107 records, C09K (materials for misc. applications) in 35.5%, and C08K (polymer additives) in 29.0%. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to well over 100% and should be read as overlap, not as a partition of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 107 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Admixtures for Calcined Clay and Low Carbon Cements with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about admixtures for calcined clay and low carbon cements and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a recent representative filing
WO2025177262A1 — Superplasticizer and workability retention agent for limestone calcined clay cement
Filed by Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IIT Madras) and published 2025-08-28, the application discloses a composition combining sulphonated naphthalene formaldehyde, sodium hexametaphosphate, sodium carbonate and (optionally) sodium silicate meta-nonahydrate in specified weight ranges, with the hexametaphosphate-to-carbonate ratio fixed between 4.5 and 5. The stated purpose is to raise workability of limestone calcined clay cement binder while controlling the dosage needed and reducing workability loss over time.Abstract condensed from the published application; see the linked record for full claim language.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20110272142A1 | Radiation-Induced Thickening and Radiation-Induced Triggering for Set-On-Command Sealant Compositions and Met… | 42 |
| 2 | US20080295741A1 | Slump Retention in Cementitious Compositions | 34 |
| 3 | WO2007047407A2 | Slump retention in cementitious compositions | 29 |
| 4 | CN107129177A | 一种抗泥型聚羧酸减水剂及制备方法和在混凝土中的应用 | 27 |
| 5 | CN111592272A | 一种机制砂混凝土预应力构件用聚羧酸减水剂及其制备方法 | 17 |
| 6 | US20110265996A1 | Radiation-Induced Thickening for Set-On-Command Sealant Compositions and Methods of Use | 16 |
| 7 | WO2011023935A1 | Radiation-induced thickening for set-on-command sealant compositions and methods of use | 16 |
| 8 | CN108947301A | 一种复配型抗泥牺牲剂及其制备方法 | 13 |
| 9 | US8162057B2 | Radiation-induced thickening for set-on-command sealant compositions and methods of use | 13 |
| 10 | US20120252953A1 | Cationic Polymers For Treating Construction Aggregates | 12 |
Citation counts favour older documents simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside the searched corpus; read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a ranking of current commercial importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the numbers say about where this field stands
Read together, the filing trend, class mix and citation pattern point to a field with an established chemistry core and an active, still-growing periphery.
Sustained rather than early-stage growth
The move from 5 filings in 2021 to 6 in 2024 is modest in absolute terms but consistent, and it comes after the 2017 baseline of 3 — this is a field still adding filings each complete year rather than one that peaked and is now declining.
Claims cluster at the cement-polymer boundary
A large minority of records carry both a cement class and a materials or polymer-additive class, which means most admixture claims are written to cover the interaction between the binder chemistry and the polymer, not one domain alone.
Oilfield sacrificial-agent chemistry recurs here
A small but consistent slice of the dataset sits in earth and rock drilling classes, reflecting that sacrificial-agent and set-on-command chemistries developed for well cementing show up again as prior art for calcined clay admixtures.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to admixtures for calcined clay and low carbon cements, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The assignee ranking covers 51 companies and individual inventors across the 107 records in scope, with one leader well ahead of a long tail of smaller filers.
One assignee dominates the ranked leaders
The top-ranked assignee holds 42 families against a fifth-place count of 6 and a tenth-place count of 5, a steep drop-off that marks this as a field with one entrenched filer and a long tail of occasional entrants rather than a handful of evenly matched competitors.
A small inventor cluster drives much of the core chemistry
The strongest co-assignee links in the dataset connect the same three individuals across multiple shared families, suggesting a compact inventing team behind a meaningful share of the leader's portfolio rather than filings spread across many independent teams.
Filing activity is split across several jurisdictions, not one
China leads by receiving-office count, but the United States, Australia, the WIPO PCT route, Canada and the United Kingdom all carry meaningful volume, so a freedom-to-operate check confined to one office would miss a large share of the relevant filings.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | 0 | — |
| W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn. | 0 | — |
| GCP Applied Technologies Inc. | 0 | — |
| RAO VIKRAM | 0 | — |
| MYERS DAVID F | 0 | — |
| GUPTA VIJAY | 0 | — |
| LEWIS SAMUEL J | 0 | — |
| TURNER CRAIG ROBERT | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a concentrated core and several under-filed edges; the next steps depend on whether the goal is defensive clearance or offensive filing.
Run a freedom-to-operate check across offices
Because filing activity splits across China, the US, Australia, the PCT route, Canada and the UK, a clearance search limited to a single office will miss relevant prior art. Cross-check the calcined-clay-specific claims across all six.
Open Eureka to search across jurisdictions →Map the leader's claim boundaries before drafting
With one assignee holding 42 of 107 families, a new filing in this space should start by charting exactly what that portfolio claims, rather than assuming the space is open.
Explore the leading assignee's portfolio in Eureka →Probe the under-claimed branches directly
Sacrificial polymer design specific to clay mineralogy and hydration-acceleration dosage control for LC3 systems both show thinner coverage than the core superplasticizer claims — worth a dedicated search before assuming the ground is clear.
Search the white-space branches in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
Calcined clay, especially in limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) blends, has a much higher water demand than ordinary Portland cement because of its fine particle size and surface chemistry. Standard polycarboxylate superplasticizers dosed at conventional rates often lose effectiveness quickly in these blends, so admixture patents in this space specifically target dosage increase, workability retention over time, and hydration acceleration to compensate for the clay's water uptake. This is why the search scope for this landscape combines cement-chemistry terms with the specific technical symptoms these admixtures are built to solve, rather than just searching for superplasticizers generally.
The ranking used in this landscape covers 51 assignees across 107 published records, and one assignee leads with 42 families, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 6. That gap indicates a field where one company has built a broad portfolio while most other filers, including several individual inventors, hold only one or a few families each. Anyone evaluating freedom to operate should start with that leading portfolio rather than assuming the field is evenly distributed.
Filings grew from 5 in 2021 to 6 in 2024, a 20% increase over that span, and 2024 is the most recent year for which the publication record can be treated as essentially complete. Because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the lower counts visible for 2025 and 2026 in the raw data reflect that lag rather than an actual slowdown, and should not be read as declining interest. The honest read is sustained, moderate growth through the last complete year, with the tail years still filling in.
WO2025177262A1, filed by Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IIT Madras) and published in 2025, discloses a superplasticizer and workability-retention agent combining sulphonated naphthalene formaldehyde, sodium hexametaphosphate, sodium carbonate and optional sodium silicate meta-nonahydrate, within stated weight ranges and a fixed hexametaphosphate-to-carbonate ratio. Anyone formulating a similar multi-component workability agent for limestone calcined clay cement should check their composition against the specific weight ranges and that fixed ratio, since those are the features most likely to define the claim boundary. It does not cover polycarboxylate-only superplasticizer chemistry outside that specific multi-component formulation.
Relative to the dense core of superplasticizer and workability-retention claims in C04B and C09K, the dataset shows thinner coverage in condensation-polymer superplasticizer backbones (C08G), natural macromolecule derivative admixtures (C08H), and dosage-control mechanisms specific to hydration acceleration in LC3 blends. These branches carry noticeably fewer records than the core cement and polymer-additive classes. That does not guarantee an area is legally open, but it does mark where a targeted novelty search is more likely to find room to file than in the crowded core.
Research Admixtures for Calcined Clay and Low Carbon Cements in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole admixtures for calcined clay and low carbon cements corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.