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/cubic-boron-nitride-tools-for-hardened-steel-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Cemented Carbide & Superhard MaterialsCubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel Patents
- Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees together hold 40.6% of all 12,567 records in scope, and the ranked leaders extend to 100 companies with a long tail of single or few-filing entrants.
- Filings past their peak year. Activity peaked at 488 filings in 2017; by the last complete year, 2021-to-2024 filings fell 53%, from 325 to 154 — though 2025-2026 counts are still filling in due to publication lag.
- Grinding and turning dominate the IPC mix. B24D abrasives and B23B turning/boring together account for over half of all records (30.3% and 22.3% respectively), while powder metallurgy and coating classes sit well behind.
12.6K
Published Records
41%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-53%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (325 records) with 2024 (154) — 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. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 12,567 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent activity at the intersection of cubic boron nitride (CBN) cutting tool materials and hard turning applications on hardened steel — spanning sintered CBN bodies, binder-phase chemistry, coating strategies, and the abrasive and grinding-tool formats that share the same claim space. The search string pulls records that combine CBN or PCBN insert terminology with process-side language such as white layer formation, chipping resistance and surface finish, so the corpus captures both the material science and the machining-process framing of the same underlying problem.
Records span 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, with 12,567 total published records and the same count used as patent families in the assignee ranking. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel 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 data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 12,567-record corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how records distribute across IPC subclasses (a single record can carry several classes, so shares sum to more than 100%).
Filings rose sharply to a 2017 peak, then declined
Filings climbed to a peak of 488 in 2017. Using the last full three-year window that avoids publication-lag distortion, filings fell 53% from 325 in 2021 to 154 in 2024. Counts for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete and should not be read as a continued decline.
Abrasives and turning classes lead the IPC mix
B24D (grinding tools & abrasives) covers 30.3% of records and B23B (turning & boring) covers 22.3%, followed by C04B ceramics (19.5%), C23C coatings (14.9%) and C22C alloys (13.6%). Powder metallurgy (B22F) and general-purpose materials (C09K) each sit at 10.1%, marking the smaller but still active branches of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 12,567 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 Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cubic boron nitride tools for hardened steel and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey patents
Representative and most-cited records
Representative record
Cubic boron nitride sintered body cutting tool (US10202309B2)
MITSUBISHI MATERIALS CORPORATION
A cBN sintered material cutting tool comprising a body with cBN grains at 40 to under 60 volume percent and a binder phase containing a Ti compound and Al2O3, with an Al content bound by a linear relationship to the cBN volume fraction. The binder phase includes fine Al2O3 as part of its microstructure.Filed by Mitsubishi Materials Corporation; published 2019-02-12.
Most-cited records in this corpus
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5152917A | Structured abrasive article | 1,507 |
| 2 | US5201916A | Shaped abrasive particles and method of making same | 1,188 |
| 3 | US5366523A | Abrasive article containing shaped abrasive particles | 882 |
| 4 | US5958794A | Method of modifying an exposed surface of a semiconductor wafer | 859 |
| 5 | US5672097A | Abrasive article for finishing | 778 |
| 6 | US5984988A | Shaped abrasive particles and method of making same | 630 |
| 7 | US5975988A | Coated abrasive article, method for preparing the same, and method of using a coated abrasive article to abra… | 543 |
| 8 | US6129540A | Production tool for an abrasive article and a method of making same | 538 |
| 9 | US20090169816A1 | Shaped, fractured abrasive particle, abrasive article using same and method of making | 492 |
| 10 | US10254499B1 | Additive manufacturing of active devices using dielectric, conductive and magnetic materials | 486 |
Citation counts reflect a searched corpus that favours older, foundational filings — treat them as a signal of influence rather than of current commercial relevance.
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 Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel 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 numbers mean for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once concentration, technology mix and momentum are read together.
Concentration
40.6% of 12,567 records
held by the top 5 assignees
Claim space is occupied at the top
The top five assignees combined hold 40.6% of all records in scope, and the top ten hold 59.0%. That density means core sintered-body and binder-phase compositions around the leading players' filings are heavily prior-arted; new entrants are more likely to find room in adjacent process or coating claims than in core composition claims.
Based on the full 100-company ranking returned by the dataset.
Momentum
-53% (2021→2024)
filings, last complete window
Filing volume is well off its 2017 peak
After peaking at 488 filings in 2017, activity fell substantially — the last fully comparable window shows a 53% drop from 325 filings in 2021 to 154 in 2024. Recent-year assignee filings also show sharp single-year declines, though 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete because of publication lag.
2025-2026 counts should not be read as confirming a continued fall.
Technology mix
30.3% B24D, 22.3% B23B
share of 12,567 records
Abrasive form factor outweighs pure turning-insert claims
Grinding tools and abrasives (B24D) carry the largest single-class share, ahead of turning and boring (B23B). That split suggests the field has as much active claim activity in wheel and abrasive-article formats as in insert geometry — a distinction worth checking before assuming CBN IP is only about cutting inserts.
Shares add to more than 100% because records can carry multiple IPC classes.
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 cubic boron nitride tools for hardened steel, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel 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
Players
Who holds the ground, and where it is loosening
The leader board is dense at the top but momentum has cooled across nearly all of the most active assignees in the most recent year, which is where new filing strategies tend to find room.
Leader
1,544 records
leading assignee
A clear single leader, then a steep drop
The leading assignee holds 1,544 records versus 624 at fifth place and 376 at tenth — a steep gradient that flattens quickly outside the top ten, where the long tail of the 100-company ranking begins.
Ranking is measured in records/families across 100 companies.
Momentum
-100% YoY
for several formerly active filers
Even established filers have gone quiet recently
Several assignees that filed steadily in prior years show zero filings in the latest year, alongside sharp YoY declines (-80%, -83%, -25%) among others still active. This is consistent with the broader post-2017 slowdown rather than exit from the field.
Momentum figures reflect the latest year in the dataset, which is subject to publication lag.
Co-filing
10 pairs identified
co-assignee relationships
Co-assignment mostly reflects corporate structure
The strongest co-assignee pairs in this dataset largely pair a parent company with its regional or divisional counterpart, rather than independent-company collaboration — a sign that most joint filings here are internal group filings, not cross-industry partnerships.
Strongest pair recorded at 538 shared records.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Sumitomo Electric Hardmetal Corp | 3 | -25% |
| Element Six (UK) Ltd | 2 | -80% |
| 3M Innovative Properties Co | 1 | -83% |
| Saint-Gobain Abrasives Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Sumitomo Electric Industries Ltd | 0 | -100% |
| Mitsubishi Materials Corp | 0 | — |
| 3M Co | 0 | — |
| Saint-Gobain Abrasifs SA | 0 | -100% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel 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 from here
The dataset points to a field with occupied core claims and a slowing but not dead filing rate — the next steps depend on whether you are clearing freedom-to-operate or looking for a filing angle.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top ten
With 59.0% of all records held by the top ten assignees, any new sintered-body or binder-phase composition should be checked against this group's filings first.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches
Process-side claims around white layer formation and chipping resistance show comparatively less density than core material composition — worth a closer look before assuming the space is closed.
Run a white space analysis in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel 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 CBN hard-turning tool patents
The dataset ranks 100 companies by patent record count, with a clear leader holding 1,544 records against 624 at fifth place and 376 at tenth. The top five assignees combined account for 40.6% of all 12,567 records in scope, and the top ten account for 59.0%. Beyond the top ten the ranking flattens into a long tail of smaller filers, so competitive attention should focus on the leading cluster rather than the full list.
Filing activity peaked in 2017 at 488 records and has declined since. Comparing the last two full years available for trend analysis, filings dropped 53% from 325 in 2021 to 154 in 2024. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete because patent publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so the recent-year numbers understate actual activity and should not be read as a continuing crash.
US10202309B2, assigned to Mitsubishi Materials Corporation, claims a cBN sintered cutting tool body with cBN grains at 40 to under 60 volume percent and a binder phase built around a Ti compound and Al2O3, where the Al content is tied to the cBN volume fraction by a defined linear relationship. Anyone designing a similar composition within that volume-percent and Al-content window should review the claim's specific boundary conditions closely. Designs that fall clearly outside that compositional window, or that use a materially different binder chemistry, are less likely to be blocked by it.
Relative to the dense core claims around sintered-body composition and abrasive article formats, process-oriented claims — white layer formation control, chipping-resistance edge geometry, and specific binder-phase microstructure engineering — show comparatively lighter filing density in this dataset. Powder metallurgy routes to CBN sintering also sit at a lower share of records than the dominant grinding and turning classes. These are reasonable starting points for a novelty search rather than confirmed white space, since density alone does not prove the area is open.
A single patent record can be classified under multiple IPC subclasses at once, since a filing may simultaneously touch on abrasives, turning tools, coatings and alloy composition. Each class share reported here — for example 30.3% for B24D or 22.3% for B23B — is calculated against the full 12,567-record total, not against the sum of all class counts. That is why summing the listed percentages produces a number well above 100%, and it is standard behaviour for IPC-based technology composition charts.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel 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 Cubic Boron Nitride Tools for Hardened Steel in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole cubic boron nitride tools for hardened steel 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.