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/flotation-collectors-and-selectivity-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Flotation Collectors and SelectivityFlotation Collector and Selectivity Patents: Concentration, Claim Space and Where It Is Still Open
- Top-heavy but not locked down. the top 5 assignees account for 62.4% of all 101 records in scope, yet 22 of the 32 ranked companies sit outside the top 10 with only a handful of filings each.
- Filing activity has gone quiet since its 2021 peak. filings fell from 10 in 2021 to 0 by 2024 — a complete reset that predates the 18-month publication lag affecting 2025-2026 counts.
- Almost nine in ten records sit under B03D (flotation) alone. 88.1% of the 101 records classify there, while adjacent classes like material analysis (G01N, 5.0%) and wet separation (B03B, 1.0%) barely register.
101
Published Records
62%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-100%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (10 records) with 2024 (0) — 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 101 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 101 published records matching flotation collector chemistry and selectivity mechanics — xanthate and non-xanthate collectors, dosage optimisation, pulp potential control and gangue rejection — filed between 2015 and the 2026-07-31 cut-off. The scope spans sulfide mineral separation broadly, from collector formulation claims through to recovery-grade curve methods, rather than a single reagent family.
Coverage is filtered to records that combine a collector or flotation mechanism term with a selectivity or process-control term, so it captures the intersection of reagent chemistry and separation performance rather than flotation equipment or unrelated mineral processing.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flotation Collectors and Selectivity 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 trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 101-record set: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2015-2026
Filings rose to a peak of 10 in 2021 before falling to 0 by 2024, a -100% swing over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent bars will fill in over time rather than reflecting an active decline.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
B03D (flotation) covers 88.1% of the 101 records, making it the dominant classification by a wide margin. C22B (metal extraction and refining) follows at 16.8%, with polymer chemistry (C08F, 7.9%) and metal compounds (C01G, 5.9%) forming a smaller secondary cluster. Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares sum to more than 100% of the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 101 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 Flotation Collectors and Selectivity covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Flotation Collectors and Selectivity with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about flotation collectors and selectivity and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Most-cited records and a representative filing
Representative filing
WO2021052939A1 — A collector for froth flotation, a method for producing the collector and the use thereof
ROVA, ULRIKA
Describes a froth flotation collector built on at least 20 wt% lignin particles sized 5 micrometres or less, optionally blended with a conventional collector (xanthate, dithiophosphate or dithiocarbamate) and optionally combined with activators, frothers, depressants or pH regulators, for use in mineral separation.Filed by an individual assignee (ROVA, ULRIKA) rather than a corporate entity — a reminder that this field still has room for independent filers to stake out formulation claims.
Most-cited records in this dataset
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6827220B1 | Flotation of sulfide mineral species with oils | 64 |
| 2 | US5795466A | Process for improved separation of sulphide minerals or middlings associated with pyrrhotite | 62 |
| 3 | US4192737A | Froth flotation of insoluble slimes from sylvinite ores | 34 |
| 4 | WO2000009268A1 | Flotation of sulfide mineral species with oils | 30 |
| 5 | US4587013A | Monothiophosphinates as acid, neutral, or mildly alkaline circuit sulfide collectors and process for using sa… | 26 |
| 6 | GB1339337A | Method for treating floated solids | 25 |
| 7 | US20120145605A1 | Collectors for flotation of molybdenum-containing ores | 20 |
| 8 | US5311997A | Selective separation of finely-divided minerals by addition of selective collector reagent and centrifugation | 20 |
| 9 | WO2021052939A1 | A collector for froth flotation, a method for producing the collector and the use thereof | 16 |
| 10 | US9505011B1 | Mixed decyl mercaptans compositions and use thereof as mining chemical collectors | 15 |
Ranked by citation count within the searched corpus. Older filings accumulate more citations simply by being available longer, so treat this as a signal of influence on the field, not of current technical 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 Flotation Collectors and Selectivity 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 says
Three patterns stand out once the filing trend and classification data are read together.
Concentration
62.4% / 82.2%
top 5 / top 10 share of 101 records
A short leader group, then a long tail
The top 5 assignees hold 62.4% of all 101 records and the top 10 hold 82.2%, but the ranking runs to 32 companies total, so more than 20 entrants hold only a few filings each. That combination — a concentrated core plus a genuine tail — means new entrants are filing against an occupied centre but into open edges.
Based on the full 32-company assignee ranking
Momentum
10 → 0
peak-year filings (2021) vs. 2024
Activity has reset from its 2021 high
Filings peaked at 10 in 2021 and fell to 0 by 2024, a complete -100% swing. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025-2026 counts are still filling in and should not yet be read as a continuation of decline.
2024 is the most recent year treated as complete
Classification
88.1%
of 101 records classified under B03D
Filing is concentrated in flotation itself, not adjacent steps
B03D (flotation) covers 88.1% of records, while material analysis and testing (G01N) reaches only 5.0% and wet separation of solids (B03B) just 1.0%. Analytical and downstream process-control claims are comparatively rare against the core flotation mechanism itself.
Shares sum above 100% because records can carry multiple IPC classes
Geography
US 26 · AU 18 · CA 18
leading receiving offices
Filing is spread across mining jurisdictions, not centred on one office
The United States leads with 26 filings, closely trailed by Australia and Canada at 18 each, with WIPO PCT filings at 11. This spread reflects where sulfide mineral processing operations are concentrated rather than a single dominant filing venue.
Counts by receiving office, not mutually exclusive with family counts
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 flotation collectors and selectivity, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flotation Collectors and Selectivity 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 gate sits
The ranked leaders hold the bulk of filings, but the technology composition data points to sub-areas where claim density is thin.
Leader
29 records
single largest filer in the ranking
One assignee well ahead of the rest
The top-ranked assignee holds 29 of the 101 records, well clear of fifth place at 6 and tenth place at 3. That gap suggests a company with a sustained, deliberate filing programme rather than incidental patenting around a single product line.
Out of 32 ranked assignees
Mid-tier
6 → 3
fifth place vs. tenth place, in records
A fast drop-off after the leader
Filing counts fall quickly after the top position: fifth place holds 6 records and tenth place holds only 3. This shape — one clear leader, then a compressed middle tier — is typical of a field where a small number of specialty chemical and mining-services firms compete for the same reagent claim space.
Ranked by record count
Collaboration
7 pairs
co-assignee pairings identified
Co-filing is limited and mostly university-linked
Only 7 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest examples pair a university-affiliated entity with individual named inventors rather than joint corporate ventures. Collaborative filing is the exception here, not the norm.
Strongest pairs each appear once in the dataset
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP | 0 | — |
| VERSITECH INC | 0 | — |
| BASF SE | 0 | — |
| TEEBEE HLDG | 0 | — |
| Evonik Operations GmbH | 0 | — |
| Clariant Produkte (Deutschland) GmbH Group Intellectual Property | 0 | — |
| The University of Queensland | 0 | — |
| MIM Holdings Ltd | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flotation Collectors and Selectivity 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 concentrated core and a thin periphery. The next steps depend on whether the goal is defensive clearance or identifying open filing space.
Map the leader's claim boundaries
With one assignee holding 29 of 101 records, a freedom-to-operate review should start by mapping exactly which collector chemistries and dosage ranges its granted claims cover before assuming a formulation is blocked.
Explore assignee claim scope in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches
Analytical and process-control classes such as G01N and B03B carry far fewer records than the core B03D flotation class, suggesting room for claims tied to measurement or wet-separation integration rather than collector chemistry alone.
Run a white-space search in EurekaWatch for the 2025-2026 publication catch-up
The apparent drop to 0 filings by 2024 is partly a filing count, not a filing rate — records from 2025 and 2026 are still publishing. Re-run the trend in a future quarter before concluding the field has gone quiet.
Track filing trends in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flotation Collectors and Selectivity 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 flotation collector patents
One assignee leads the ranked field with 29 of the 101 records in this dataset, well ahead of the fifth-ranked company at 6 records and the tenth-ranked company at 3. The ranking covers 32 companies in total, so beyond the leader the field spreads across a long tail of smaller filers. This concentration pattern suggests a sustained, deliberate filing programme at the top rather than a field with many equally matched competitors.
Filing activity peaked at 10 records in 2021 and fell to 0 by 2024, a complete reset over that three-year span. However, publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in any dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as evidence of an active slowdown. The fairer comparison is the 2021-to-2024 window, which is the most recent period that can be treated as filing-complete.
Xanthate collectors are the historically dominant chemistry for sulfide mineral flotation and appear throughout the most-cited records in this dataset, including older foundational filings on sulfide mineral species separation. Non-xanthate alternatives — including lignin-based and other biopolymer collector formulations — appear in more recent filings, often blended with a conventional collector rather than replacing it outright. The patent record shows more claim density around established xanthate and thiophosphate chemistries than around fully non-xanthate formulations.
Relative to the core flotation classification (B03D, covering 88.1% of the 101 records), adjacent areas such as material analysis and testing (G01N, 5.0%) and wet separation of solids (B03B, 1.0%) carry far fewer filings. This gap suggests that claims tied to measurement, process monitoring or integration with wet-separation steps are comparatively open compared with collector chemistry itself, which is more heavily claimed.
The top 5 assignees account for 62.4% of all 101 records in scope, and the top 10 account for 82.2%. That leaves the remaining 22 of the 32 ranked companies holding a small share of filings between them. The field is concentrated at the top but not closed: the long tail indicates real room for new entrants to file around specific formulations or process steps not covered by the leaders' claims.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flotation Collectors and Selectivity 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 Flotation Collectors and Selectivity in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole flotation collectors and selectivity 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.