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/electrochemical-machining-ecm-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Electrochemical MachiningElectrochemical machining patents: mapping who holds the ground and where filings have gone quiet
- Filing has cooled since 2022. The peak year on record is 2022 at 25 filings, and the count by 2026 has fallen back toward single digits — this is a maturing claim landscape, not a growing one.
- One assignee dominates the leaderboard. The leader holds 91 records against a fifth-place figure of 16 and a tenth-place figure of 11 — a steep drop-off rather than a gradual one.
- Nearly every record sits inside one subclass. 97.0% of the 567 records in scope carry a B23H classification, meaning almost all competitive activity is concentrated in a single IPC bucket.
567
Published Records
30%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-50%
3-Yr Growth (lag-adjusted)
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview
What the ECM patent record actually shows
Electrochemical machining removes metal by controlled anodic dissolution rather than mechanical cutting, which makes it useful for hard alloys, thin walls and complex internal geometries where tool wear or heat-affected zones would otherwise be a problem. The 567 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off and are drawn from filings that reference electrolyte flow, gap control, stray removal, tool design or surface finish alongside the core ECM process classes. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent year of this trend understates actual filing activity.
The picture that emerges is one of an established process technology rather than an emerging one: a small number of assignees built dense early portfolios, filing volume peaked several years ago, and the classification data shows the field has stayed narrowly defined around core machining and electrolytic removal rather than spreading into many adjacent domains.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015–2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Electrochemical Machining (ECM) 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
The Numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 567 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A peak in 2022, then a decline
Annual filings rose from 3 in 2017 to a peak of 25 in 2022, then declined toward 1 by 2026 (a partial year). The midpoint sitting at the peak year signals a field that grew, plateaued and is now contracting in visible filing terms — though the final one to two years are always undercounted due to publication lag.
Concentration in B23H and C25F
97.0% of the 567 records carry a B23H classification (electro/chemical machining proper), and 19.2% also carry C25F (electrolytic removal and cleaning) — the two core classes for the process. Everything else, from turbine components (F01D, 4.1%) to casting (B22D, 2.6%) and pump parts (F04C, 2.5%), appears in single-digit shares, showing the applied end-uses are secondary to the core process claims.
Shares are the percentage of the 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 Electrochemical Machining (ECM) covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Electrochemical Machining (ECM) with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about electrochemical machining (ecm) and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The most-cited records in this dataset
Representative Filing
WO2021242457A3 — Discretized electrolyte flow for ECM cathodes
VOXEL INNOVATIONS, INC.
A discretized-flow electrode for use in electrochemical machining (ECM) and a corresponding method and system for using the discretized-flow cathode are disclosed. The machining face of the discretized-flow cathode is divided into a plurality of discrete sections. The discrete sections may be geometrically shaped, and they are separated at the machining face by an electrolyte flow outlet channel, and each discrete section includes an electrolyte flow inlet local to the discrete section. The plurality of discrete sections of the machining face of the discretized-flow electrode divide the electrolyte flow into approximately equal portions for even electrolyte flow across the machining face.Filed by Voxel Innovations, Inc., published 2022-03-03. Notable as one of the more recent filings addressing electrolyte flow uniformity at the cathode face, a persistent gap-control problem in ECM tooling.
View full filingHighest-citation ECM patents in scope
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5338416A | Electrochemical etching process | 133 |
| 2 | US6402931B1 | Electrochemical machining using modulated reverse electric fields | 93 |
| 3 | US5114548A | Orbital electrochemical machining | 78 |
| 4 | US6835299B1 | Electrochemical machining method and apparatus | 74 |
| 5 | CN103521861A | 基于三维复合流场的整体叶盘型面电解加工装置及方法 | 73 |
| 6 | US7192260B2 | Progressive cavity pump/motor stator, and apparatus and method to manufacture same by electrochemical machini… | 72 |
| 7 | US6234752B1 | Method and tool for electrochemical machining | 68 |
| 8 | US20010054449A1 | Alloy pipes and methods of making same | 63 |
| 9 | US20150001093A1 | Methods and systems for electrochemical machining of an additively manufactured component | 62 |
| 10 | US5833835A | Method and apparatus for electrochemical machining by bipolar current pulses | 60 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings, since they have had more time to accumulate citations — treat this as a measure of influence on subsequent filings, 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 Electrochemical Machining (ECM) 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 means for a filing or freedom-to-operate decision
Three patterns worth acting on before drafting new claims or scoping a competitor review in this space.
Concentration
30.2% of 567 records
held by the top 5 assignees
Claim density sits with a small group
The top 5 assignees combined hold 30.2% of all 567 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 40.7%. The gap from first place (91 records) to fifth (16) is steep, meaning one organisation's portfolio anchors much of the prior art any new filing must clear.
Source: assignee ranking, 567 records
Filing momentum
Peak 25 in 2022
then declining toward 2026
Activity has cooled from its 2022 peak
Filings rose from 3 in 2017 to 25 in 2022 and have fallen since, including among the historically active assignees, several of whom show zero filings and -100% YoY in the most recent year. That does not mean the process is abandoned — it means the core claim space is largely staked out.
Source: filing trend, 2017-2026
Classification spread
97.0% in B23H
of all 567 records
Almost everything sits in one subclass
97.0% of records carry the B23H electro/chemical machining classification, with C25F electrolytic removal appearing in 19.2%. Application-specific classes like turbine components or fuel systems each account for under 5%, suggesting most patent activity addresses the process itself rather than a specific downstream part.
Source: IPC composition, 567 records
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 electrochemical machining (ecm), with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Electrochemical Machining (ECM) 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 the field is thin
The ranked leaders make up a field with a hard core and a long tail. New entrants attempting to design around the leader's 91-record position will find fewer competitors, and less prior art, in the branches below.
Leader
91 records
leading assignee
One assignee's portfolio anchors the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 91 of the 567 records in scope, well ahead of fifth place at 16 and tenth place at 11. Any freedom-to-operate review in core ECM process claims should start with this portfolio.
Source: assignee ranking
Mid-tier
16 to 11 records
5th to 10th place
A second tier holds meaningful but narrower positions
Assignees ranked fifth through tenth hold between 16 and 11 records each — enough to matter in specific sub-claims like tool design or gap control, but without the leader's breadth across the full process.
Source: assignee ranking
Momentum
0 in latest year
for several historically active filers
Even established filers have slowed
Several of the historically most active assignees show zero filings in the most recent year, including one with -100% YoY. This is consistent with the overall trend decline from its 2022 peak rather than a shift away from any single company.
Source: recent-year momentum by assignee
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| General Electric Co | 0 | -100% |
| Koninklijke Philips N.V. | 0 | — |
| Rolls-Royce plc | 0 | — |
| United Technologies Corporation | 0 | — |
| Delphi Technologies plc | 0 | — |
| Lehr Precision Inc | 0 | — |
| Corning Inc | 0 | — |
| Doncasters Turbo Products Division | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Electrochemical Machining (ECM) 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 analysis
The dataset points to a field with settled core claims and a thinner set of application-specific branches. Two directions follow from that.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's portfolio first
With 91 of 567 records held by one assignee, any new ECM filing in core machining or gap control should be checked against that portfolio before drafting claims elsewhere.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaLook past B23H for less-crowded claim territory
Application-specific classes such as turbine components, fuel systems and casting each sit under 5% of records, suggesting downstream application claims are less contested than core process claims.
Run a white-space search in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Electrochemical Machining (ECM) 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 the ECM patent landscape
The assignee ranking for this dataset is led by a single company holding 91 of the 567 records in scope, with a steep drop to fifth place at 16 records and tenth place at 11. This means the field has one dominant portfolio rather than several closely matched competitors. Anyone assessing freedom to operate in core ECM process claims should treat that leading portfolio as the primary reference point, since the next nine ranked assignees combined only bring the top 10 total to 40.7% of all records.
Filing activity peaked in 2022 at 25 filings per year, up from 3 in 2017, and has declined since toward the most recent recorded year. Several of the historically most active assignees show zero filings and negative year-over-year change in the latest period. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the very last year or two in any such trend will always look thinner than it eventually turns out to be, but the multi-year decline from the 2022 peak is a real pattern, not just a lag artefact.
Almost all records, 97.0% of the 567 in scope, carry a B23H classification covering electro/chemical machining directly, and 19.2% also carry C25F for electrolytic removal and cleaning. Downstream application classes like turbine components (F01D), fuel systems (F02M) and metal casting (B22D) each appear in under 5% of records. That spread indicates the bulk of patenting activity addresses the machining process itself rather than specific end-use parts, which is where less-contested claim space tends to sit.
WO2021242457A3, filed by Voxel Innovations, describes a discretized-flow cathode for ECM in which the machining face is divided into separate sections, each with its own local electrolyte inlet, so that electrolyte flow is distributed evenly across the tool face. The claims center on this sectioned-electrode structure and its flow-outlet channels between sections. For anyone designing an ECM tool electrode with distributed or zoned electrolyte delivery, this filing is a relevant reference to review before finalizing an equivalent design.
The technology composition data shows heavy concentration in core B23H/C25F process claims but thin coverage in specific mechanisms like in-process gap-width sensing, pulse-reverse waveform tuning, and additive-manufactured tool electrodes. These sit adjacent to the dense core rather than inside it, meaning a well-scoped claim in one of these mechanisms is less likely to run into the leading assignee's existing portfolio. Confirming this requires a targeted search against the specific mechanism rather than the broad ECM class alone.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Electrochemical Machining (ECM) 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 Electrochemical Machining (ECM) in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole electrochemical machining (ecm) 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.