https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/fatigue-and-fracture-assessment-of-metals-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Metals & Alloys
Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals Patents
  • Filing is concentrated in China. 60 of the tracked applications route through the China receiving office, against single digits everywhere else — the practical centre of gravity for this claim space.
  • Software has overtaken lab testing. G06F (electric digital data processing) appears in 50 records versus 35 for G01N (material analysis and testing), showing the field has shifted toward computational life-prediction models rather than physical rigs.
  • Momentum has cooled since 2024. Filings peaked at 14 in 2024; several of the most active universities and Hitachi show 0 filings in the latest tracked year, with some down -100% year on year.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
75
Published Records
16%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+180%
3-Yr Growth (lag-adjusted)
CN
Leading Jurisdiction
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

Fatigue and fracture assessment of metals spans two overlapping disciplines: physical characterisation methods that measure how a material cracks or degrades under repeated load, and computational methods that predict when it will fail before it does. This dataset tracks patent families filed between 2015 and 2026 that combine fatigue-assessment language — S-N curve, stress intensity factor, residual stress effect, notch sensitivity, life prediction model — with classification codes covering testing (G01N3), simulation (G06F30) and metal treatment (C22F1).

The mix of IPC codes present in this set is itself informative: a claim space that pulls heavily from G06F and G16C alongside G01N is one where digital-twin and computational-mechanics approaches are displacing, or at least supplementing, physical test-rig methods as the site of new invention.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1CHANGAN UNIV3
  2. 2HUNAN UNIV3
  3. 3CHONGQING JIAOTONG UNIV2
  4. 4HARBIN INST OF TECH2
  5. 5Tongna Testing & Certification Group Co., Ltd.2
  6. 6NANJING UNIV OF AERONAUTICS & ASTRONAUTICS2
  7. 7BEIJING UNIV OF TECH2
  8. 8MITSUBISHI HITACHIPOWER SYST LTD2
  9. 9UNIV OF ELECTRONICS SCI & TECH OF CHINA2
  10. 10DALIAN UNIV OF TECH2
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals 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 trends and technology composition

75 patent families make up this landscape, filed between 2015 and 2026 (the 2026 figure is partial, and the true 2025 volume is understated because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months).

A flat-to-declining trend after a 2024 peak

Filings rose from 2 in 2017 to a midpoint of 8 in 2022, then peaked at 14 in 2024. Several previously active filers, including major Chinese universities and Hitachi, show zero filings in the most recent tracked year — consistent with either a genuine slowdown or a reporting lag that has not yet cleared.

A flat-to-declining trend after a 2024 peak048111522017201820192020202120222023142024202502026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

Computation dominates over physical testing

G06F (digital data processing) leads with 50 records, ahead of G01N (material analysis and testing) at 35. G16C (computational chemistry) at 11 and G06N (AI-based computing) at 4 confirm that a meaningful share of new filings describe prediction models and simulation pipelines rather than new test apparatus.

Computation dominates over physical testingG06F · Electric digital data processi…5066.7%G01N · Material analysis & testing3546.7%G16C · Computational chemistry1114.7%G01M · Testing machine & structure ba…68.0%G06Q · Business, commerce & admin dat…56.7%G06N · Computing based on AI models45.3%G06T · Image data processing & genera…45.3%G01B · Measuring length & dimensions22.7%Other810.7%

Shares are the percentage of the 75 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 Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about fatigue and fracture assessment of metals and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key Patents

Most-cited records in this landscape

Representative Filing
EP2538195A12012-12-26

Fracture Surface Analysis System and Method (Hitachi)

HITACHI, LTD.

The filing describes a system that estimates fracture mechanics data from a surface-irregularities waveform: it captures the steplike surface of a fracture, corrects overall gradient and removes noise, then identifies and counts uneven portions along a measuring line to derive an average distance between features. The stated aim is estimating fracture mechanics parameters with better accuracy and reproducibility than manual methods, without requiring a full physical test cycle.Abstract condensed from the original filing text.

EP2538195A1 — patent drawing 1EP2538195A1 — patent drawing 2
View filing details
Highest-citation records
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1WO2022121203A1一种球壳表面三维裂纹扩展疲劳寿命的计算方法115
2US4299120AMethod for determining plane strain fracture toughness of non-elastic fracture mechanics specimens64
3CN105466772A一种基于临界面法的多轴短裂纹扩展寿命预测方法41
4JP1996122221AIntegrity evaluating method and device for underground buried pipe32
5CN110147618A基于断裂力学的航空发动机涡轮叶片可靠性评估方法20
6US4232554AThermal emission flaw detection method17
7KR1020130118061AMethod for predicting influence by corroded damage of aircraft13
8JP2009085737AFracture surface analysis method and analyzer13
9CN110455627A基于恒位移加载的材料与高压氢气相容性评价方法及系统12
10CN113642192A一种超高周疲劳寿命预测方法、装置及可存储介质11

Citation counts are drawn from a searched corpus and favour older, longer-indexed records — read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a ranking 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 Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals 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
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 →
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 implies for filing strategy

Three patterns stand out once family counts, IPC mix and receiving-office data are read together.

Geography
60 of 75 via China
receiving office share

China is the practical filing venue

With 60 records routed through the China receiving office against 5 for the United States and single digits elsewhere, most competitive activity — and most prior art a new filer must clear — sits in Chinese-language filings from universities and engineering institutes.

Receiving office data, this dataset
Technology mix
G06F 50 vs G01N 35
records by IPC subclass

Prediction models are the active claim surface

The larger share of filings sits in digital data processing rather than material testing apparatus, meaning the more contested claim territory is life-prediction algorithms and simulation workflows, not new physical test rigs.

IPC subclass counts, this dataset
Momentum
Peak 14 in 2024
filings, single year

Activity has cooled from its 2024 high

Several previously prolific filers report 0 filings in the latest year and year-over-year declines of -100%, which — allowing for publication lag — points to either a genuine pause or filings still working through the pipeline.

Filing trend and assignee momentum, this dataset
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 fatigue and fracture assessment of metals, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals 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 is filing, and where the gaps sit

Filing activity is dominated by Chinese universities and transport-infrastructure research institutes, with a long tail of single-filing entrants and a small number of corporate names such as Hitachi. Co-assignment is rare in this dataset — only 4 pairs — and mostly links a university to a regional highway or road-engineering operator, suggesting most inventive work is done in-house rather than through joint ventures.

Academic filers
4 co-assignee pairs total
joint filings

Universities file mostly alone

Institutions such as Chang'an University, Hunan University, Dalian University of Technology and Harbin Institute of Technology account for much of the volume, typically filing independently rather than in joint ventures with industry.

Assignee and co-assignee data, this dataset
Corporate filers
0 filings, latest year
Hitachi momentum

Corporate activity is thin and has stalled

Hitachi is the clearest corporate name in the set, but shows no filings in the most recent tracked year, leaving the corporate side of this landscape largely quiet relative to the academic side.

Recent-year momentum, this dataset
Infrastructure links
2 of 4 pairs involve a highway operator
co-assignee pattern

Infrastructure operators appear as co-filers, not lead filers

Regional highway and road-engineering groups co-file with universities on a small number of applications, pointing to applied fatigue-assessment work tied to specific transport infrastructure projects rather than general materials research.

Co-assignee pairs, this dataset
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth a closer look
Branches with thin filing density relative to the core S-N curve and stress-intensity-factor claims
multiaxial short-crack life predictionAI-assisted notch sensitivity modellingburied-pipeline integrity evaluationresidual-stress-aware digital twinsimage-based crack growth measurement
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Chang'an University0-100%
Hunan University0-100%
Hitachi, Ltd.0
Chongqing Jiaotong University0
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China0
Dalian University of Technology0-100%
Harbin Institute of Technology0
Tongji University0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals 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 where computation is doing more of the inventive work than physical testing, and where filing has cooled from a 2024 peak. Two directions are worth pursuing before committing R&D or filing budget.

Map claim boundaries around life-prediction models

Given that G06F and G16C together outnumber G01N filings, a freedom-to-operate review should weight computational claim language as heavily as physical test-method claims.

Explore claim mapping in Eureka

Watch for the 2025-2026 filing catch-up

Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent 2024 peak and subsequent drop may partly reverse as more recent filings publish; re-run this landscape periodically rather than treating the current curve as final.

Set up monitoring in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals 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 this landscape

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals 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 Fatigue and Fracture Assessment of Metals in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole fatigue and fracture assessment of metals corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.