Centrifugal Pump Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing peaked in 2017 at 15 families and has not returned to that level the 2022 midpoint sits at 9, so this is a flat-to-declining filing curve, not a growth story — occupied claim space rather than an expanding frontier.
- Blood-pump and medical-device claims dominate the citation leaderboard the five most-cited records are all implantable or CPAP-adjacent pump patents, not industrial centrifugal pumps, which tells you where the influential prior art actually sits.
- A61M devices for body fluids account for 97 of 240 records against F04D's 176 meaning a large share of this dataset's hydraulic-optimization claims were filed to protect medical pumps, not process or water pumps — a split worth checking before you assume industrial scope.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent families combining centrifugal pump, centrifugal pumping or pump impeller language with claims to impeller design optimization, hydraulic optimization or volute design. It spans filings from 2015 through the July 2026 cut-off, drawing on 240 published records and 240 distinct patent families — a one-to-one ratio that suggests limited continuation filing in this set. The corpus sits mainly in F04D (non-positive-displacement pumps) but has a substantial secondary cluster in A61M, the body-fluid device subclass, reflecting how much impeller and volute optimization work has been driven by blood-pump and CPAP blower engineering rather than industrial process pumps.
Publication lags actual filing by roughly eighteen months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in the trend chart will rise as later filings publish; treat the most recent two years as a floor, not a ceiling. The receiving-office mix — led by the United States, followed by Europe, China, WIPO and Australia — points to a filing strategy weighted toward US and EPO protection with selective PCT and Australia/NZ coverage rather than broad global filing.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 240-family dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how those families split across IPC subclasses.
A peak in 2017, no return to that level since
Filings rose to 15 in 2017, the high point of the series, then eased toward the 2022 midpoint of 9. That pattern reads as flat-to-declining rather than growing, consistent with a field where the core impeller and volute optimization techniques were staked out early and later filers are working narrower variations.
F04D and A61M dominate; five smaller subclasses trail well behind
F04D (non-positive-displacement pumps) leads with 176 of 240 records, and A61M (body-fluid devices) follows with 97 — the two overlap where blood pumps and CPAP blowers use centrifugal impeller geometry. F16C (shafts, bearings and couplings), G06F (digital data processing, likely control/optimization software), A61N, C02F, C25B and F04B each sit in the 10-16 range, marking adjacent but far less contested territory.
Shares are the percentage of the 240 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Centrifugal Pump Design Optimization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about centrifugal pump design optimization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
Stacked self-priming pump and centrifugal pump (US8123458B2)
A stacked pump arrangement for mixed-media flow includes a first, self-priming, centrifugal pump with a volute having an inlet and an outlet and a second straight centrifugal pump mounted to an upper portion of the first centrifugal pump, the second straight centrifugal pump also having a volute with an inlet and an outlet. A transition chamber is connected, at one end, to the first centrifugal pump volute outlet and is connected, at another end, to the second straight centrifugal pump volute inlet.Filed by THE GORMAN-RUPP CO., granted 2012-02-28. Chosen here as representative of the industrial-pump side of this dataset rather than the medical-device side that dominates the citation table.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7866944B2 | Compact low noise efficient blower for CPAP devices | 1,014 |
| 2 | WO2003103745A2 | Expandable blood pump and related methods | 532 |
| 3 | US20060155158A1 | Percutaneously introduced blood pump and related methods | 285 |
| 4 | US6422990B1 | Blood pump flow rate control method and apparatus utilizing multiple sensors | 256 |
| 5 | US5928131A | Magnetically suspended fluid pump and control system | 244 |
| 6 | WO2007134405A1 | Compact low noise efficient blower for CPAP devices | 166 |
| 7 | US20120253103A1 | Centrifugal blood pumps with reverse flow washout | 117 |
| 8 | US6345961B1 | Hydraulic energy recovery device | 90 |
| 9 | US6375607B1 | Magnetically suspended fluid pump and control system | 83 |
| 10 | US20090246013A1 | Compact Low Noise Efficient Blower for Cpap Devices | 82 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references — read this as a map of influence, not of what matters today. All five top-cited records here are blood-pump or respiratory-blower patents, which is notable given the broader dataset splits toward industrial F04D pumps.
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 mean for a filing decision
Three read-outs from the trend, the IPC split and the citation data, aimed at where a new filer would actually sit.
The curve is declining, not growing
A field that peaked in 2017 and has not recovered to that level by the 2022 midpoint is not attracting fresh entrants at the rate it once did. That does not mean the space is exhausted — it means the obvious combinations were claimed early, and new filings need a genuinely narrower or cross-domain angle to clear prior art.
Two pump communities, one search string
Industrial and process pump filings (F04D) outnumber medical body-fluid pump filings (A61M) roughly two to one in raw count, but the most-cited prior art is almost entirely on the medical side. A search limited to F04D alone would miss the citation network that actually shapes freedom-to-operate risk here.
Influence sits with older CPAP and blood-pump art
The five most-cited records are all respiratory-blower or implantable blood-pump patents, several with citation counts in the hundreds. Any new filing touching impeller geometry for fluid-handling devices — even industrial ones — should expect this older medical-device art to surface in examination.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to centrifugal pump design optimization, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the activity has gone quiet
Co-assignment in this dataset is thin — only four co-assignee pairs total, most involving named individual inventors rather than corporate partners — which points to a field of largely independent filers rather than joint-development consortia. Recent-year momentum is uniformly flat: every tracked assignee shows zero filings in the latest year, and at least one shows a full year-over-year drop from a prior filing.
Gorman-Rupp anchors the industrial side
Gorman-Rupp's stacked self-priming/centrifugal pump patent, and its position in the strongest co-assignee pairs in this dataset, mark it as the clearest industrial-pump filer with sustained volute and impeller claims rather than a one-off filing.
Respiratory and blood-pump filers hold the citation weight
The assignees behind the top-cited records — CPAP blower and implantable blood-pump patents — sit outside the traditional industrial-pump assignee set entirely, and their filings are the ones most likely to be cited against a new application.
No assignee shows current-year activity
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum, including established names, records zero filings in the latest year, and one shows a full year-over-year decline. Given the ~18-month publication lag, some of this will fill in, but the broader trend is already pointed down from 2017.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| ResMed Motor Technologies Inc. | 0 | — |
| Wasco Corporation | 0 | — |
| Bivacor, Inc. | 0 | — |
| The Gorman-Rupp Company | 0 | — |
| BiVACOR / Bio-Probe Inc. | 0 | — |
| Pentair Flow Technologies, LLC | 0 | -100% |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) | 0 | — |
| Weirless/Wells Larry Group Corporation | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific follow-up questions rather than a single conclusion — here is where to look next.
Check freedom-to-operate against medical-device art
Because the most-cited records in this space are CPAP and blood-pump patents rather than industrial pump patents, a novelty or FTO search limited to F04D subclasses will miss the prior art most likely to be cited against a new filing.
Run a cross-subclass prior art searchRe-examine the declining filing curve before committing budget
A peak in 2017 with no recovery by 2022 suggests the core impeller and volute combinations are well claimed; any new filing strategy should target the smaller, less-contested IPC branches rather than the crowded core.
Map the under-claimed branchesWatch assignee momentum for the next publication cycle
Every tracked assignee shows zero filings in the latest year, but the 18-month publication lag means 2025-2026 filings are still arriving; revisit momentum data in six to twelve months before concluding the field has gone quiet.
Track assignee filing activityCommon questions about centrifugal pump design optimization patents
This dataset identifies 240 published patent families filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine centrifugal pump or impeller language with impeller design optimization, hydraulic optimization or volute design claims. The one-to-one ratio of records to families indicates relatively little continuation filing within the set. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the true count for 2025-2026 filings will be higher once those applications publish.
The dataset shows a mix of industrial pump manufacturers and medical-device companies rather than a single dominant filer. Gorman-Rupp appears as a sustained industrial-side filer with volute and stacked-pump claims, while the highest-cited patents in the space belong to companies working on CPAP blowers and implantable blood pumps. Co-assignment is thin across the dataset, pointing to mostly independent filing rather than joint ventures.
Implantable blood pumps and CPAP blowers use centrifugal impeller and volute geometry, so patents on hydraulic optimization for these devices fall under the same IPC subclasses as industrial pump patents. In this dataset, A61M (devices for body fluids) accounts for 97 of 240 records, second only to F04D's 176, and the five most-cited records overall are all medical or respiratory devices. Anyone searching this space for industrial applications should not filter these out, since they carry significant citation weight.
Not currently, based on this dataset. Filings peaked at 15 in 2017 and had fallen to 9 by the 2022 midpoint, a flat-to-declining pattern rather than a growth curve. That suggests the well-known impeller and volute optimization techniques were claimed relatively early, and new entrants need a more specific angle — such as a cross-domain application or an under-claimed IPC branch — to find open claim space.
US8123458B2, held by Gorman-Rupp, claims a stacked pump arrangement combining a self-priming centrifugal pump with a second straight centrifugal pump connected through a transition chamber, aimed at mixed-media flow. Anyone designing a stacked or dual-volute centrifugal arrangement for mixed-media handling should review this claim scope closely, particularly the transition-chamber connection between the two volute outlets and inlets. Working around it likely means avoiding that specific stacked, dual-volute transition-chamber architecture rather than avoiding stacked pumps generally.
Research Centrifugal Pump Design Optimization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole centrifugal pump design optimization 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.