AHSS Simulation Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- A small, concentrated field. just 15 patent families sit at the intersection of AHSS chemistry claims and simulation methods, with filing peaking at 9 in 2022 and no clear upward trend since.
- Heat treatment and alloy claims dominate. C21D and C22C each cover 13 of the 15 records, while G06F digital-processing claims — the actual simulation software layer — appear in only 2.
- Filing is split across jurisdictions with no single hub. Europe (EPO) leads with 6 filings, followed by India at 4, the US at 3 and China at 2 — a geographically scattered rather than concentrated field.
Filing growth compares 2021 (3 records) with 2024 (1) — 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
This dataset tracks patent families that combine advanced high-strength steel (AHSS) composition or heat-treatment claims with computational methods — phase-field simulation, crystal plasticity modeling, forming simulation and microstructure-property modeling — under IPC classes C22C38/00, G06F30 and C21D8. It is a narrow, cross-disciplinary slice of the metallurgy field: most records are steel-composition patents that reference a modeling step, rather than standalone simulation-software patents.
With only 15 families total, this is a field still being defined rather than one with settled leaders. Filing activity peaked in 2022 and the most recent years should be read with caution, since publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months.
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 15-family dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and where those families sit across the IPC classification system.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 9 in 2022, the midpoint of the coverage window, then eased off. That flat-to-declining shape after the peak suggests the intersection of AHSS chemistry and formal simulation methods has not yet found a second wave of filers.
IPC subclass concentration
C21D (heat treatment of metals) and C22C (alloys) each appear in 13 of the 15 records, meaning nearly every family is anchored in steel composition or processing claims. G06F (digital data processing) appears in only 2 records and G01N (material analysis and testing) in 1 — the modeling and testing layers are present but thin, which is where claim space is least occupied.
Shares are the percentage of the 15 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Advanced High-Strength Steel Simulation and Modeling with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about advanced high-strength steel simulation and modeling and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited records
High-strength steel sheet and method for manufacturing the same (US20240141452A1, JFE Steel Corporation, 2024-05-02)
The high-strength steel sheet has a chemical composition with MSC value in the range of 2.7% to 3.8% by mass defined by a specific formula, wherein the high-strength steel sheet has a microstructure including specific microstructures in a surface layer region extending from the surface of the steel sheet to a depth of 100 μm and in an inner region other than the surface layer region. The high-strength steel sheet has the maximum height of the surface roughness of 30 μm or less, a tensile strength of 980 MPa or more, a uniform elongation of 6% or more, and a ratio of 10-cycle plane bending fatigue strength to tensile strength (fatigue limit ratio) of 0.45 or more.Claims are anchored in composition ranges and measured mechanical properties (tensile strength, elongation, fatigue limit ratio) rather than in a simulation method itself — typical of how modeling appears as supporting evidence inside a materials claim in this field.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20240158881A1 | High-strength steel sheet and method for manufacturing the same | 2 |
| 2 | CN113139238A | 基于材料本构优化模型的汽车高强度钢冲压回弹优化方法 | 2 |
| 3 | US12392006B2 | High-strength steel sheet and method for manufacturing the same | 1 |
| 4 | EP4123041A1 | High-strength steel sheet and method for manufacturing same | 1 |
Citation counts are low across the board (1-2 each), consistent with a small, recently active field rather than one with an established influential core.
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. Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (4 of 4 rows); 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 mean for a filing decision
Three read-throughs from the trend, classification and citation data above.
Activity peaked and has not been sustained
The midpoint year of the coverage window is also the peak, and later years fall away. With publication lag of roughly 18 months, the most recent years are understated, but the shape does not show a field accelerating into a second wave.
Composition and heat treatment claims are dense
Nearly every family stakes a claim in alloy composition or heat treatment. New entrants filing narrow variations on tensile strength or elongation ranges are filing into already-crowded claim space.
The simulation-method layer is thin
Only two records carry a digital-data-processing classification, meaning the computational modeling techniques named in the search — phase-field, crystal plasticity, forming simulation — are mostly referenced as supporting method rather than claimed as the invention.
No single jurisdiction dominates filing
Filing is spread across four receiving offices without one clear hub, unlike fields where a single national office accounts for the majority of activity. That spread makes freedom-to-operate checks a multi-jurisdiction exercise rather than a single-market one.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to advanced high-strength steel simulation and modeling, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
With 15 families total, this field has no dominant assignee — filing is distributed across steelmakers, research institutes and a university, with three co-assignee pairs pointing to joint industry-research filing.
Joint filing between steelmakers and research arms
The strongest co-assignee links are between a steel group and its affiliated material technology research institute, and between that group and a regional production branch — a pattern of joint filing between operating and R&D entities rather than independent invention.
No assignee shows recent-year momentum
Every tracked assignee, including JFE Steel and Sichuan University, shows zero filings in the latest tracked year. Given publication lag, this likely understates true activity, but it also means no single filer has pulled ahead recently.
A small field, not yet consolidated
Fifteen families is too few to support a concentration argument in either direction. This is a field where a well-drafted first claim in an under-served sub-area can still stake meaningful ground.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| JFE Steel Corporation | 0 | — |
| Handan Iron and Steel Group Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| HBIS Company Limited, Handan Branch | 0 | — |
| Hebei HBIS Material Technology Research Institute Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Sichuan University | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field that is small, unevenly classified and not yet led by any one filer. These are the practical next steps for an R&D or IP team.
Map the software claim gap precisely
Only 2 of 15 families carry a G06F classification despite the search targeting simulation methods by name. Pull the full claim text of those two records to see exactly how narrow or broad the existing coverage is before drafting into that space.
Explore this gap in EurekaTrack the steelmaker-institute filing clusters
The co-assignee pairs suggest active joint programs between steel producers and their research institutes. Monitoring these specific entity pairs for new filings will surface momentum before it shows up in aggregate yearly counts.
Set up assignee tracking in EurekaRe-run the trend after the lag window clears
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2024-2026 figures in this dataset are provisional. Revisit the filing trend in six to twelve months to see whether the 2022 peak was a one-off or the start of a real cycle.
Rerun this landscape in EurekaFrequently asked questions
This dataset identifies 15 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine AHSS composition or processing claims with simulation-related methods such as phase-field simulation, crystal plasticity modeling or forming simulation. That is a small field by patent-landscape standards, and filing peaked at 9 families in 2022 before easing off. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the true count for 2024-2026 is likely higher than currently visible.
No single assignee dominates this dataset; JFE Steel Corporation holds a representative filing on high-strength steel sheet manufacture, and several Chinese steel groups and research institutes appear as co-assignees on joint filings. Recent-year momentum figures show zero filings in the latest tracked year across all named assignees, which reflects publication lag as much as any slowdown in R&D. This is a field to watch for emerging leaders rather than one with an incumbent to displace.
The dominant classes are C21D (heat treatment of metals) and C22C (alloys), each present in 13 of the 15 families, reflecting that most patents are steel-composition inventions that reference modeling as a supporting method. G06F (digital data processing), the class most associated with simulation software itself, appears in only 2 records, and G01N (material testing) in 1. That imbalance is the clearest signal of where claim space remains open.
The thinnest coverage sits in the computational-method layer rather than the materials layer: forming-simulation software, crystal plasticity constitutive-law claims, and microstructure-property predictive models are referenced in patent abstracts but rarely claimed directly under G06F30. A first, well-drafted claim describing a specific simulation algorithm or model architecture — rather than a steel composition range — has more room to stand out in this 15-family field.
Not clearly. Filing rose to a peak of 9 families in 2022, the midpoint of the tracked window, and has not sustained that pace since. Combined with the small overall dataset size of 15 families, this reads as an early-stage, exploratory field rather than one in a confirmed growth cycle. Anyone benchmarking momentum should re-check the trend in a year once the publication lag on 2024-2026 filings has cleared.
Research Advanced High-Strength Steel Simulation and Modeling in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole advanced high-strength steel simulation and modeling 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.