Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/cable-stayed-bridge-bridge-engineering-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Construction & Civil · Patent LandscapeCable-Stayed Bridge Engineering Patents: Stay Cable, Pylon and Anchorage Filings Mapped
- Flat filing activity. the trend runs from 0 in 2017 to a peak of 4 in 2018 and back near 0 by the 2022 midpoint — this is not a growth field by filing count.
- Railway-adjacent IPC classes dominate. E01B (railway track) and B61B (cableways) together outweigh E01D (bridges proper), pointing to cross-domain reuse of cable and anchorage hardware.
- No assignee shows recent-year momentum. every tracked assignee, including the most active historical filers, records 0 filings in the latest year — the field is currently dormant at the top.
98
Published Records
76%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-100%
3-Yr Growth (lag-adjusted)
EP
Leading Jurisdiction
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent families where the claims combine a cable-stayed bridge with at least one of three specific design problems: stay cable design, pylon design, or cable anchorage. That combination narrows the corpus to 98 published patent families spanning 2015 through the mid-2026 data cut-off, filed across receiving offices led by Europe (EPO), the United States, Australia, New Zealand, China and Austria.
Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one or two years in the trend understate real filing activity. Even allowing for that lag, the shape of this dataset — a small peak in 2018 followed by a flat-to-declining trend — is a field with an established prior-art base rather than an active filing race.
Filing activity, 2017-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
98 patent families were published against this search string between 2015 and mid-2026. The trend and the IPC split below show a field concentrated on a handful of hardware problems rather than a broad emerging cluster.
A peak in 2018, then decline
Filings ran at 0 in 2017, peaked at 4 in 2018, sat at 1 by the 2022 midpoint, and show no recovery through the 2026 cut-off. This is a flat-to-declining filing pattern, not an emerging technology curve.
Railway and cableway classes lead, not bridges
E01B (railway track and permanent way) accounts for 57 records and B61B (railway systems and cableways) for 25, both ahead of E01D (bridges, 41 records). The remaining classes — E04C, G01L, G01N, F16F, B21F — each hold single digits, marking narrow, thinly-filed technical branches around structural components, load sensing, material testing, damping and wire fabrication.
Shares are the percentage of the 98 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cable-stayed bridge bridge engineering and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey patents
The most-cited records in this corpus
Most-cited record
US6292967B1 — TMD-damped stay cable and method and TMD
CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY LABORATORIES, INC.
Wind-rain induced vibrations of a cable-stayed bridge are damped using tuned mass damper(s) ("TMD"). A TMD-damped cable-stayed bridge is comprised of a bridge having at least one span, at least one pylon, and at least one stay cable extending from a point on the pylon to a point on the span, together with at least one tuned mass damper in damping communication with the stay cable. The TMD can be mounted on the stay cable in a low-profile position relative to the cable.Filed by Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc.; granted 2001-09-25; cited 75 times within this corpus, the highest of any record here.
Highest-citation patent families
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6292967B1 | TMD-damped stay cable and method and TMD | 75 |
| 2 | EP1001089A1 | Novel technique for stay cable system | 41 |
| 3 | EP1035350A1 | Method and device for damping oscillations and vibrations of cables | 40 |
| 4 | US20040237222A1 | Method for anchoring parallel wire cables and suspension system for a construction work | 31 |
| 5 | US7010824B2 | Method for anchoring parallel wire cables and suspension system for a construction work | 31 |
| 6 | CN101393173A | 一种斜拉索锚固区磁致伸缩导波检测系统 | 26 |
| 7 | CN109489882A | 大尺寸模型试验用斜拉桥拉索锚固及索力测试装置及方法 | 17 |
| 8 | CN101545244A | 具有适应拉索偏心及具备自锁功能的斜拉索内置式阻尼器 | 14 |
| 9 | US6272999B1 | Elevated cableway system | 9 |
| 10 | US20040244634A1 | Elevated cableway system | 8 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are a signal of prior-art weight, not of current commercial relevance.
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.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the data actually shows
Three patterns stand out once filing trend, IPC composition and citation weight are read together.
Filing activity
0 → 4 → 0
2017 to peak to 2026
A short filing pulse, not a curve
The trend opens at 0 in 2017, peaks at 4 in 2018, and returns to near-zero by the 2022 midpoint with no recovery through the 2026 cut-off. Read against an 18-month publication lag, even the most generous interpretation is a field with a brief filing pulse rather than sustained investment.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Technology mix
57 + 25 vs 41
E01B + B61B vs E01D
Railway hardware, not bridge structure, dominates the claims
E01B and B61B together outnumber E01D, the core bridges class. That split suggests much of the claimed hardware — cable runs, anchorage fittings, damping components — originates in railway and cableway engineering and is being adapted to cable-stayed bridge applications rather than designed for bridges first.
IPC subclass distribution
Citation concentration
75 citations
top-cited record
Prior art anchors around a small set of older patents
The five most-cited records include two anchoring-system families (US20040237222A1 and US7010824B2, both cited 31 times) and three damping-related patents, with US6292967B1 leading at 75 citations. New filings in stay-cable damping or parallel-wire anchorage sit close to this prior art.
Most-cited records table
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to cable-stayed bridge bridge engineering, with the prior art for and against each one.
Co-assignee activity is thin
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| WETTSTEIN HANS | PUGIN ANDRE O | 3 |
| WETTSTEIN HANS | AASHEIM PER | 3 |
| PUGIN ANDRE O | AASHEIM PER | 3 |
| Zhengzhou Transportation Planning, Survey & Design Institute Co., Ltd. | Zhongmou Yuzhong Road & Bridge Co., Ltd. | 2 |
| WETTSTEIN HANS | LAMOREAUX BEN | 2 |
| PUGIN ANDRE O | LAMOREAUX BEN | 2 |
| AASHEIM PER | LAMOREAUX BEN | 2 |
| Chang'an University | Xi'an Shiyou University | 2 |
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the corpus, the strongest being a three-way cluster among individual inventors (WETTSTEIN HANS, PUGIN ANDRE O and AASHEIM PER, each pairing appearing 3 times), indicating collaboration here runs through named individuals rather than corporate joint filings.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Assignees
Who holds the claims — and who has gone quiet
Filing activity in this dataset is historic rather than current: every tracked assignee, from corporate filers to named individual inventors, shows 0 filings in the latest year. That makes recent-year momentum a poor differentiator here and the historical filing record the more useful signal.
Momentum check
0
latest-year filings, all tracked assignees
No active filer at the top
Assignees ranging from Airbus and Freyssinet entities to Zhengzhou-area civil engineering institutes and the individual inventors behind the strongest co-filing cluster all show zero filings in the most recent tracked year. Historical rank in this corpus should not be read as a signal of who is currently active.
Recent-year momentum by assignee
Collaboration pattern
10 pairs
co-assignee pairs in the corpus
Collaboration runs through named inventors, not firms
The strongest co-filing links — WETTSTEIN HANS with PUGIN ANDRE O, WETTSTEIN HANS with AASHEIM PER, and PUGIN ANDRE O with AASHEIM PER, each appearing 3 times — are individual-inventor clusters rather than corporate joint ventures, unusual for a civil-engineering hardware field.
Co-assignee pairs
Geographic filing
17 / 14 / 13
EPO / US / Australia receiving-office counts
Filing is spread across offices, not concentrated in one jurisdiction
Receiving-office counts are fairly close across Europe (EPO, 17), the United States (14), Australia (13), New Zealand (12), China (11) and Austria (10), indicating applicants have pursued protection in multiple jurisdictions rather than filing predominantly at home.
Receiving office distribution
Recent-year filing momentum
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Airbus International | 0 | — |
| Freyssinet | 0 | — |
| HOU YINCHENG | 0 | — |
| Zhengzhou Transportation Planning, Survey & Design Institute Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| WETTSTEIN HANS | 0 | — |
| PUGIN ANDRE O | 0 | — |
| AASHEIM PER | 0 | — |
| Chang'an University | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's next
Where to take this
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, competitive tracking, or identifying open claim space.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on anchorage claims
The two highest-cited anchorage patents (US20040237222A1 and US7010824B2, both cited 31 times) cover parallel-wire cable anchoring for suspension systems. Any new anchorage design should be checked against their specific claim language before filing.
Explore anchorage prior art in EurekaWatch the under-claimed IPC branches
E04C, G01L, G01N, F16F and B21F each hold three or fewer records. That is thin enough that a well-drafted claim in load-sensing anchorage instrumentation or spring-based damper alternatives may face little direct prior art.
Map white space in EurekaTrack individual inventors, not just corporate assignees
The strongest collaboration signal in this corpus runs through named individuals rather than company joint filings. A competitive-intelligence review should follow those inventor names across assignees, not just the corporate roll-up.
Trace inventor networks in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about cable-stayed bridge patents
This dataset identifies 98 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 whose claims combine a cable-stayed bridge with stay cable design, pylon design, or cable anchorage. That is a narrow, hardware-specific slice of bridge engineering patents overall, not a count of every cable-stayed bridge patent filed worldwide. Broader searches on bridge construction generally would return a substantially larger set.
No, the evidence points the other way. Filings ran at 0 in 2017, peaked at 4 in 2018, and had fallen back to 1 by the 2022 midpoint with no recovery through the 2026 cut-off. Even accounting for the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication that understates the most recent year or two, this is a flat-to-declining trend rather than a growing one.
Historical filers in this corpus include corporate assignees such as Airbus and Freyssinet-related entities alongside individual inventors and several China-based civil engineering institutes, but every one of them shows zero filings in the most recent tracked year. That means the historical ranking reflects who built the prior art base, not who is currently filing, so it should be read as a map of established positions rather than a live competitive signal.
US6292967B1, held by Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. and granted in 2001, claims a tuned mass damper (TMD) mounted on a stay cable to control wind-rain induced vibration on a cable-stayed bridge. It is the most-cited record in this corpus at 75 citations, meaning it sits at the centre of the prior art that later damping-related filings had to design around. Anyone developing a stay-cable vibration damper should review its specific claim scope on mounting position and damping communication with the cable.
The IPC composition shows heavy concentration in E01B (railway track, 57 records), E01D (bridges, 41 records) and B61B (cableways, 25 records), while E04C, G01L, G01N, F16F and B21F each hold three or fewer records. Those thinly-populated classes cover structural component integration, load-sensing instrumentation, material testing, spring-based damping alternatives and wire-strand fabrication — areas where claim space is comparatively open relative to the core stay-cable and anchorage hardware that dominates the dataset.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Cable-Stayed Bridge Bridge Engineering in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole cable-stayed bridge bridge engineering 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.