Drilling Vibration Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- 61.4% sits with five companies. The top five assignees account for 1,185 of the 1,931 records in scope, with a long tail of single- and low-filing entrants behind them.
- Filing has cooled but not collapsed. From 2021 to 2024 — the last year publication lag lets us treat as complete — filings fell 17%, from 54 to 45, after peaking in 2019 at 93.
- Coverage leans heavily on one class. 89.7% of records carry an E21B earth-and-rock-drilling classification, while control systems (G05B) and vibration measurement (G01H) remain comparatively thin at 3.9% and 2.2%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (54 records) with 2024 (45) — 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 1,931 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this field covers
Drilling vibration and bit dysfunction patents cover the detection and mitigation of stick-slip vibration, bit whirl and torsional oscillation at the drill bit, together with the downhole and surface systems that measure and correct for them — shock-absorbing subs, weight-on-bit control, and sensor packages that flag cutter impact damage before it propagates up the string. The search string pairs a torsional-dysfunction term with a lateral or measurement term, so the corpus is weighted toward records that treat vibration as a system problem rather than a bit-material problem alone.
The 1,931 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, filed mostly through the United States, WIPO's PCT route, the EPO, the UK and Canada — a spread consistent with an oilfield-services technology prosecuted wherever operators drill rather than wherever it is invented.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,931-record corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings ran from 53 in 2017 to a peak of 93 in 2019, then eased to 45 by 2024 — a 17% decline over the 2021-2024 span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in under normal publication lag and should not be read as a continued drop.
IPC subclass composition
E21B dominates at 89.7% of records, consistent with a corpus centred on drilling operations. G01V geophysics (9.4%) and G06F data processing (6.7%) show meaningful secondary presence, while G01H vibration measurement (2.2%) and F16F springs/dampers (1.2%) are comparatively lightly claimed despite being central to the mechanical mitigation side of the problem.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,931 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Drilling Vibration and Bit Dysfunction with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about drilling vibration and bit dysfunction and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in this corpus
Vibration detection in a drill string based on multi-positioned sensors
The filing describes a drill string with a first vibrational sensor at the bit and a second above it, each measuring axial and lateral vibration at its location, with a processor comparing the two readings to determine the type of vibration present.US20120222900A1 — Halliburton Energy Services
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6021377A | Drilling system utilizing downhole dysfunctions for determining corrective actions and simulating drilling co… | 539 |
| 2 | US5842149A | Closed loop drilling system | 506 |
| 3 | US6233524B1 | Closed loop drilling system | 408 |
| 4 | US5460233A | Diamond cutting structure for drilling hard subterranean formations | 396 |
| 5 | US5706906A | Superabrasive cutting element with enhanced durability and increased wear life, and apparatus so equipped | 247 |
| 6 | US6408958B1 | Superabrasive cutting assemblies including cutters of varying orientations and drill bits so equipped | 237 |
| 7 | US20110186353A1 | System and Method for Monitoring and Controlling Underground Drilling | 235 |
| 8 | US20040256152A1 | Real-time drilling optimization based on MWD dynamic measurements | 232 |
| 9 | US5864058A | Detecting and reducing bit whirl | 204 |
| 10 | US6202770B1 | Superabrasive cutting element with enhanced durability and increased wear life and apparatus so equipped | 199 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial relevance.
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 readings of the concentration, trend and classification data that matter more than the raw counts on their own.
Claim space is occupied at the top, open below it
Five assignees hold 1,185 of the 1,931 records in scope. That level of concentration means core stick-slip and bit-whirl detection claims are heavily prior-arted, but the remaining 38.6% is spread across a long tail — a sign that adjacent implementation details still have room.
A cooling trend, not a stalled one
Filings dropped from 54 in 2021 to 45 in 2024 after peaking at 93 in 2019. That is a real pullback from peak activity, but it sits well above the 2017 starting level of 53, so the field has not returned to its earliest baseline.
Mechanical drilling claims dwarf measurement claims
E21B earth-and-rock-drilling classification touches nearly nine in ten records, while G01H vibration measurement sits at just 2.2% and F16F dampers at 1.2%. Sensor fusion and damping-hardware claims are thinner on the ground than the mechanical drilling claims that surround them.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to drilling vibration and bit dysfunction, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Schlumberger Limited | Schlumberger Technology LLC | 24 |
| Schlumberger Technology Corporation | Schlumberger Canada Limited | 15 |
| Schlumberger Limited | Schlumberger Canada Limited | 15 |
| Schlumberger Technology Corporation | Schlumberger Limited | 14 |
| Schlumberger Limited | Schlumberger Holdings Limited | 11 |
| Baker Hughes Holdings LLC | WELCH ROBERT M | 10 |
| Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. (US) | CHEN SHILIN | 10 |
| Schlumberger Limited | Geoquest Systems, Inc. | 10 |
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the corpus, and the strongest links run between Schlumberger-affiliated entities — suggesting cross-company co-development is rare and most patenting happens inside a single corporate family.
Who holds the ground, and who is still moving
The assignee ranking covers 100 companies counted in records; the leader alone holds 514 of the 1,931 records, more than the next four combined.
One assignee dominates the corpus
The top-ranked assignee holds 514 records, well ahead of fifth place at 74 and tenth place at 36 — a steep drop-off that marks this as a leader-and-field structure rather than a tightly bunched top tier.
Filing pace is easing even among leaders
One of the Schlumberger-affiliated entities filed 2 records in the latest year, down 67% year over year; another major services filer shows 0 in the latest year, down 100% YoY. Recent-year counts are still filling in under publication lag, so these should be read as early signals rather than a settled verdict.
Cross-entity filing stays inside corporate families
The strongest co-assignee pairs link a single company's own affiliated entities rather than distinct competitors, consistent with internal restructuring or joint IP holding rather than external collaboration.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Schlumberger Technology Corporation | 2 | -67% |
| Schlumberger Limited | 1 | — |
| Baker Hughes Holdings LLC | 0 | — |
| Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. (US) | 0 | -100% |
| ConocoPhillips Company | 0 | — |
| Smith International, Inc. | 0 | — |
| National Oilwell Varco, L.P. | 0 | — |
| Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations LLC | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The composition and concentration data point to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate or a filing strategy.
Map claims against the leader's 514-record portfolio
A single assignee holds more than a quarter of all records in scope. Any new filing near stick-slip or torsional-oscillation detection should be checked against that portfolio specifically before drafting.
Run a freedom-to-operate search in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches for real openings
Damper hardware and sensor-fusion classes sit far below the E21B core in filing density. That gap may reflect genuine white space or simply a different classification habit — worth confirming claim-by-claim.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the leaders' cooling filing pace
Several major filers show sharp year-on-year declines in the latest year, though publication lag means this is not yet a confirmed trend. Monitoring the next two publication cycles will clarify whether this is a real pullback.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaCommon questions about this patent landscape
One assignee leads the field with 514 of the 1,931 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked company at 74. The top five combined account for 61.4% of all records, so the field has a clear leader plus a long tail of smaller filers rather than a tightly bunched competitive set. This concentration matters for freedom-to-operate work: a new filing in core stick-slip or bit-whirl detection is most likely to run into that one company's prior art first.
Filings peaked at 93 in 2019 and eased to 45 by 2024, a 17% decline over the 2021-2024 span that can be treated as complete data. That is a real pullback from the peak, but 2024's level still sits above the 2017 starting point of 53. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still filling in because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so it is too early to call this a continued downward trend.
E21B, the earth-and-rock-drilling classification, appears on 89.7% of the 1,931 records in scope, making it by far the dominant category. G01V geophysics and G06F data processing follow at 9.4% and 6.7% respectively. Vibration-measurement-specific classes like G01H sit much lower at 2.2%, suggesting that sensing and measurement claims are less densely filed than the mechanical drilling claims around them.
The IPC composition shows several classes with filing density well below the E21B core, including F16F springs and vibration dampers at 1.2% and G01H vibration measurement at 2.2%. These lower shares point to damper hardware, sensor-fusion detection and closed-loop weight-on-bit control as branches with comparatively less claim density. That does not guarantee an open path — it means these areas warrant a closer claim-by-claim check rather than an assumption of clear space.
The corpus contains only 10 co-assignee pairs, a small number relative to 1,931 total records. The strongest of these pairs links affiliated entities within the same corporate family rather than distinct competing companies. This suggests that formal cross-company collaboration is rare in this field, and that most patenting activity happens inside a single organisation's own IP structure.
Research Drilling Vibration and Bit Dysfunction in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole drilling vibration and bit dysfunction 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.