Automated & Autonomous Drilling Patent Landscape
Automated and autonomous drilling is a highly concentrated field dominated by a small group of oilfield-services majors, with Halliburton Energy Services holding a commanding lead and Schlumberger entities collectively forming a strong second tier. The field is at a mature stage with annual filings plateaued near their 2020 peak, though the multi-year window still shows positive growth, signalling sustained but not accelerating investment.
Halliburton leads a highly concentrated field; Schlumberger entities collectively rival it
Halliburton Energy Services is the clear ranking leader in automated and autonomous drilling, ahead of multiple Schlumberger-affiliated entities that collectively represent a substantial second-tier presence, followed by Baker Hughes as the third distinct corporate group.
The top five filers account for 60% of the combined output of the hundred largest filers, a concentration level that signals high barriers to entry and limited room for smaller players to establish broad foundational positions without licensing or partnership strategies.
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Halliburton Energy Services Inc | 83 | |
| 2 | Schlumberger Tech Corp | 35 | |
| 3 | Baker Hughes Co | 21 | |
| 4 | Schlumberger Technology BV | 19 | |
| 5 | Services Petroliers Schlumberger SA | 18 | |
| 6 | Charles Machine Works Inc | 14 | |
| 7 | Pason Systems | 13 | |
| 8 | Schlumberger Canada Ltd | 10 | |
| 9 | Smith International Inc | 9 | |
| 10 | National Oilwell Varco LP | 7 |
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations LLC | 5 | |
| 12 | Rugged Engineering Designs | 4 | |
| 13 | Alcorp Ltd | 4 | |
| 14 | Gerald A. Stangl | 4 | |
| 15 | Landmark Graphics Corp | 3 | |
| 16 | Schlumberger Holdings Ltd | 3 | |
| 17 | Dresser Industries Inc | 3 | |
| 18 | Brian K. Bailey | 2 | |
| 19 | Scott B. Cole | 2 | |
| 20 | Michael F. Gard | 2 |
The leaders’ positions are reinforced by deep focus on well-drilling control and measurement-while-drilling subclasses, making it difficult for new entrants to compete on core downhole automation without either differentiated IP or access to adjacent technology angles.
Filing counts for 2025 and 2026 should be treated as provisional given standard patent publication lag of 18–24 months; the apparent softening in those years does not necessarily reflect reduced invention activity. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Filing volumes plateaued after a 2020 peak; E21B dominates the technology mix
The annual filing trend and technology-composition breakdown together reveal a maturing core and a sparse periphery of adjacent control and data-processing subclasses that incumbents have not yet fully developed.
Annual filing trend
Activity rose sharply to a 2020 peak, eased, then showed a secondary pulse in 2022 and 2024. The 2025–2026 bars are under-counted due to publication lag and should not be read as decline. The multi-year window reflects 22% recent growth, consistent with a mature but still active field.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
E21B (Earth and rock drilling — wells) overwhelmingly dominates the IPC mix, reflecting that automated drilling patents cluster tightly around downhole mechanics and wellbore control. G05B (control and regulating systems) and G01V (geophysics and gravity surveying) are present but at a fraction of E21B volume, indicating that the software and sensing dimensions of autonomous drilling remain comparatively under-patented.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Systems and methods for controlling a downhole too…
A method may include drilling a portion of a borehole with a bottomhole assembly (BHA) including the downhole tool in an automated drilling routine. A method may include receiving, at a control unit of the BHA, a disengagement downlink communication having a disengagement magnitude and disengagement duration. A method may include, based at least partially… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Self-controlled directional drilling systems and m… | 213 |
| 2 | Steerable drilling system and method | 192 |
| 3 | System and method for automatically drilling and b… | 145 |
| 4 | Self-controlled directional drilling systems and m… | 118 |
| 5 | Method of and system for controlling directional d… | 104 |
| 6 | Steerable drilling system and method | 78 |
| 7 | Method and apparatus for directional drilling | 54 |
| 8 | Self-controlled directional drilling systems and m… | 48 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the competitive structure means for R&D investment decisions
Four structural observations — maturity, concentration, collaboration patterns, and geographic spread — combine to frame where incumbent and challenger R&D dollars are most and least efficiently deployed.
Mature field with plateaued annual volumes
The lifecycle stage is Maturity: annual filings have plateaued near their 2020 peak. The multi-year window still shows positive growth (22%), so the field is not in decline, but the era of rapid foundational patent building appears to have passed. New entrants face a dense prior-art landscape in core downhole-automation subclasses, making differentiation through adjacent technology routes more viable than direct competition on established claims.
Lifecycle: MaturityTop five control 60% of major-filer output
The top five filers hold 60% of the combined output of the hundred largest filers, creating a formidable incumbency advantage. Halliburton Energy Services leads with 83 patent records, with the Schlumberger family of entities and Baker Hughes forming a recognizable second tier. Challengers such as Charles Machine Works and Pason Systems occupy a distant but distinct third tier, suggesting niche positions are achievable in specific application areas.
High concentrationCo-filing confined within Schlumberger’s own entity network
The most active co-filing pairs are all internal to the Schlumberger corporate family: Schlumberger Technology BV with Services Petroliers Schlumberger (16 co-filings), and multiple combinations of Schlumberger Tech Corp, Schlumberger Canada, and Schlumberger Holdings (each 7–9 co-filings). The one cross-group collaboration pair identified is Halliburton Energy Services with the Board of Regents of The University of Texas System (2 co-filings). True cross-company collaboration between independent competitors is absent from the evidence.
Intra-group co-filingUS-centric filing with meaningful PCT and Canadian coverage
The United States leads all jurisdictions by a wide margin, followed by Canada and WIPO (PCT) at equal counts, then Europe (EPO) and the United Kingdom. Norway and the UAE also appear, reflecting offshore and Middle East operational relevance. China has only one patent record in the corpus, a notable gap given Chinese national oil companies’ drilling activity and one that may represent either a deliberate filing strategy by incumbents or an unmonitored exposure.
US-led, global gapsGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| Schlumberger Technology BV | Services Petroliers Schlumberger SA | 16 |
| Schlumberger Tech Corp | Schlumberger Canada Ltd | 9 |
| Schlumberger Tech Corp | Services Petroliers Schlumberger SA | 9 |
| Services Petroliers Schlumberger SA | Schlumberger Canada Ltd | 9 |
| Schlumberger Tech Corp | Schlumberger Technology BV | 7 |
| Schlumberger Technology BV | Schlumberger Canada Ltd | 7 |
| Schlumberger Technology BV | Schlumberger Holdings Ltd | 3 |
| Services Petroliers Schlumberger SA | Schlumberger Holdings Ltd | 3 |
| Halliburton Energy Services Inc | Board of Regents, The University of Texas System | 2 |
| Schlumberger Tech Corp | GeoQuest Systems BV | 2 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
Halliburton leads on volume; Schlumberger entities surge as apparent new entrants in the recent window
The two largest corporate groups diverge sharply in momentum: Halliburton’s recent filing rate has contracted while multiple Schlumberger entities each register as new entrants in the recent window, collectively rebuilding Schlumberger’s presence.
Halliburton Energy Services
Halliburton Energy Services holds 83 patent records — the largest position in the corpus — concentrated on E21B 44 (drilling control), E21B 7 (directional drilling), and E21B 47 (measurement while drilling). Despite this depth, its recent-window trend shows a 63% decline versus the prior period, suggesting the company may be allowing its filing rate to moderate as the core portfolio matures rather than extending into adjacent areas.
83 patent recordsSchlumberger / SLB
Three Schlumberger entities — Schlumberger Tech Corp (35 records), Schlumberger Technology BV (19 records), and Services Petroliers Schlumberger (18 records) — each register as new entrants in the recent filing window, with Schlumberger Tech Corp alone posting 22 recent records. Their combined technology emphasis mirrors Halliburton’s (E21B 44, 47, and 7), pointing to direct head-to-head competition on core well-control and directional-drilling IP. Baker Hughes Co, with 21 patent records and a similar E21B focus, rounds out the leading tier.
35 + 19 + 18 patent records| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Halliburton Energy Services Inc | 11 | ▼ -63% |
| Schlumberger Tech Corp | 22 | ▲ new entrant |
| Schlumberger Technology BV | 14 | ▲ new entrant |
| Services Petroliers Schlumberger SA | 11 | ▲ new entrant |
| Pason Systems | 4 | ▲ new entrant |
| Schlumberger Canada Ltd | 4 | ▲ new entrant |
Control systems and digital data processing are under-served relative to the drilling-mechanics core
While E21B dominates the corpus, several adjacent IPC branches have meaningful technical relevance to autonomous drilling but relatively sparse patent coverage, suggesting room for focused investment by challengers or technology specialists.
G05B · Control & Regulating Systems
G05B accounts for only 23 patent records and roughly 8% of the top-100 filers’ combined branch coverage, despite being the natural home for closed-loop drilling automation, real-time adaptive control algorithms, and safety interlock systems. The technical path is clear — autonomous drilling fundamentally requires control-system IP — and the relatively sparse G05B filing density means a specialist in industrial automation or process control could build a defensible position here without directly competing on Halliburton’s or Schlumberger’s dense E21B holdings.
Search this in Eureka →G06F · Electric Digital Data Processing
G06F appears in only 10 patent records, representing roughly 3% of the major-filer branch output, despite the growing role of machine learning, edge computing, and digital-twin architectures in autonomous drilling decision-making. Entry via G06F-focused claims — covering data-driven wellbore state estimation, anomaly detection, or drilling optimization software — would be adjacent to rather than directly overlapping the incumbents’ dominant E21B positions, lowering freedom-to-operate risk while addressing a gap that operational data volumes are making increasingly commercially relevant.
Search this in Eureka →How leaders differ by technology route across E21B subclasses and adjacent IPC branches
Route coverage across the main technology branches in the current evidence set.
| Player | E21B 7 · Earth & rock drilling (wells) | E21B 44 · Earth & rock drilling (wells) | E21B 47 · Earth & rock drilling (wells) | E21B 41 · Earth & rock drilling (wells) | E21B 49 · Earth & rock drilling (wells) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Halliburton Energy Services Inc | Strong · 57 | Strong · 58 | Strong · 39 | Moderate · 21 | Emerging · 9 |
| Schlumberger Tech Corp | Strong · 31 | Strong · 34 | Strong · 25 | Emerging · 1 | Emerging · 2 |
| Schlumberger Technology BV | Strong · 14 | Strong · 19 | Strong · 15 | Absent | Absent |
| Services Petroliers Schlumberger SA | Strong · 13 | Strong · 18 | Strong · 13 | Absent | Emerging · 2 |
| Baker Hughes Co | Strong · 18 | Strong · 19 | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| Pason Systems | Strong · 7 | Strong · 13 | Strong · 8 | Absent | Absent |
| Schlumberger Canada Ltd | Strong · 7 | Strong · 10 | Strong · 7 | Absent | Absent |
Frequently asked questions
The corpus analyzed contains 115 patent families. This is a relatively focused field by patent-landscape standards, reflecting that core autonomous drilling IP is held by a small number of oilfield-services specialists rather than being diffused across a broad industrial ecosystem.
Halliburton Energy Services is the leading filer, with 83 patent records — nearly 2.4 times the next-largest individual entity (Schlumberger Tech Corp at 35). When Schlumberger’s affiliated entities are combined, however, their collective footprint is comparable to Halliburton’s.
The field is at the Maturity stage. Annual filings plateaued near their 2020 peak. The multi-year window still shows 22% recent growth, so the field is not declining, but the pace of new foundational patent building has moderated.
The United States is the primary filing jurisdiction, followed by Canada and WIPO (PCT) at equal volume, then Europe (EPO) and the United Kingdom. Norway and the UAE also appear, reflecting operational relevance in offshore and Middle Eastern markets. China is notably sparse with only one patent record.
The top-cited works center on self-controlled directional drilling systems and steerable drilling systems and methods, with citation counts ranging from 48 to 213 in the corpus. These foundational directional-drilling automation patents anchor the prior-art landscape that any new entrant must design around.
G05B (control and regulating systems) and G06F (electric digital data processing) are the two most under-served branches relative to their technical relevance. Both have sparse patent coverage in the corpus — 23 and 10 patent records respectively — while being directly applicable to closed-loop drilling automation and data-driven optimization. These branches present lower direct-overlap risk with incumbents’ dense E21B positions.
Built on Patsnap Open Platform
This report’s underlying patent dataset — filings, assignees, technology clusters — is open for developers via MCP and REST API. Free to start, 10,000 credits, no credit card required.
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.