Book a demo

Flow Battery Stack Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026

Flow Battery Stack Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/flow-battery-stack-and-flow-field-design-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Emerging Battery Chemistries
Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design Patents
  • Concentrated at the top. the five most active filers account for 50.0% of all 146 records in scope, and the ranked ten account for 74.7%.
  • Filing has cooled sharply. activity peaked at 31 records in 2017 and had fallen to 2 by 2022, with no rebound visible before the data cut-off.
  • Claim space is narrow but deep. 97.3% of records sit in H01M, with only small, scattered activity in catalysis, electrolytic production and computational tooling.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
146
Published Records
50%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+125%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (4 records) with 2024 (9) — 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 146 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 review covers 146 published records matching flow battery stack, flow field design and electrode felt claims combined with technical terms such as pressure drop, shunt current, membrane crossover and coulombic efficiency. The scope spans 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, and receiving-office activity is led by the United States, followed by Europe, India, the WIPO PCT route, China and Australia.

Publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent year in any trend line understates real activity. Read the tail of the trend as incomplete rather than as a genuine drop-off in the current filing year.

Records by filing year, 2015–2026
  1. 1BEIJING ZHONGKAIHONGDE TECH22
  2. 2INSTITUTE OF PROCESS ENGINEERING CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES22
  3. 3UNITED TECH CORP12
  4. 4GENERAL ELECTRIC CO9
  5. 5H2 INC8
  6. 6ENERVAULT CORP8
  7. 7TAPPI MAURIZIO7
  8. 8BROVERO CARLO ALBERTO7
  9. 9PIRACCINI GIANLUCA7
  10. 10DANZI ANGELO7
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design 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 146 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.

A peak in 2017, then a decline

Filings hit their high point at 31 records in 2017. By the 2022 midpoint the annual count had fallen to 2, and the trend stays flat through to the cut-off — a pattern of a technology that had an early burst of claiming activity rather than sustained, rising interest.

A peak in 2017, then a decline0102030403120172018201920202021202220232024202502026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

H01M dominates; everything else is a minority add-on

97.3% of the 146 records carry an H01M battery/cell/fuel-cell classification. The next largest classes — B01J catalysis and process work, C01G metal compounds, C25B electrolytic production and G06F data processing — each sit at single-digit shares, and G16C computational chemistry and B21D sheet-metal working are smaller still. Because records can carry multiple classes, these shares add up to more than 100% of the record total; they are not mutually exclusive buckets.

H01M dominates; everything else is a minority add-onH01M · Batteries, cells & fuel cells14297.3%B01J · Chemical/physical processes & …106.8%C01G · Compounds of other metals42.7%C25B · Electrolytic production of com…42.7%G06F · Electric digital data processi…42.7%B60L · Electric vehicle propulsion21.4%G16C · Computational chemistry21.4%B21D · Sheet-metal working10.7%Other42.7%

Shares are the percentage of the 146 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 Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about flow battery stack and flow field design and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key patents

Most-cited records in the corpus

Representative filing
SG10202010595RA2022-05-24

Unique Guided frame design redox flow battery stack for improved performance

VFLOW TECH PTE LTD

A redox flow battery stack built from repeating flow-frame, bipolar-plate, electrode and ion-exchange-membrane units. The filing claims a cell flow frame that gives uniform electrolyte flow distribution and low pressure drop, aiming to hold efficiency stable across the stack rather than trading power density for pumping losses.Filed by Vflow Tech Pte Ltd, dated 2022-05-24.

View full filing
Highest-citation records
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US20130011704A1Redox Flow Battery System with Multiple Independent Stacks97
2US20010041281A1Flow fields for supporting fluid diffusion layers in fuel cells89
3US20040265675A1Fuel Cell Flow Field Design42
4US20060093891A1Flow field design for high fuel utilization fuel cells40
5US20120321920A1System and method for operating a flow battery system at an elevated temperature39
6WO2012094674A2Redox flow battery system with multiple independent stacks36
7US6541145B2Flow fields for supporting fluid diffusion layers in fuel cells35
8US20130071714A1Flow battery stack with an integrated heat exchanger28
9US20160036060A1Composite electrode for flow battery24
10US20170288243A1High performance redox flow battery stack20

Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references inside this corpus; treat them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a ranking of current commercial importance.

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 Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design 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 numbers mean for a filing decision

Three read-outs from the same dataset, each pointing at a different practical question: where claim density already sits, where activity has gone quiet, and where the classification spread suggests real but thin adjacent interest.

Concentration
50.0% of 146
held by the top five filers

Core stack and flow-field claims are crowded at the top

Half of all records in scope belong to just five assignees, and three-quarters belong to ten. A new entrant filing a broad stack-architecture or flow-field claim is filing directly against a small group that already holds the majority position.

Based on the 146-record assignee ranking.
Momentum
31 → 2
records, 2017 peak to 2022 midpoint

The field's early burst has not been repeated

The 2017 peak of 31 records looks like a period of active staking-out rather than a sustained wave. Recent-year filing counts for the leading assignees sit at zero in the latest year, which is consistent with the overall decline but should be read against the 18-month publication lag.

Filing-year trend, 2015–2026 data cut-off.
Composition
97.3% H01M
share of the 146 records

Adjacent classes are present but thin

Catalysis (B01J), metal compounds (C01G), electrolytic production (C25B) and data processing (G06F) each appear in only a handful of records. That is too small a footprint to call a trend, but it marks where cross-disciplinary claims exist without being contested.

IPC subclass shares, multi-label 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 flow battery stack and flow field design, 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 Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design 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 opens up

The ranked leaders sit alongside a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants. Co-filing pairs point to a small number of tight collaborations rather than a broad ecosystem.

Leader
22 records
top-ranked assignee

One filer well ahead of the field

The leading assignee holds 22 records, noticeably more than the fifth-place holder's 8 and the tenth-place holder's 7. That gap suggests a genuine head start on stack and flow-field IP rather than a crowded first tier.

Assignee ranking, 146 records.
Collaboration
22 co-filed
strongest assignee pair

Co-filing is concentrated in a handful of pairs

Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset. The strongest, at 22 shared records, links the two Chinese research and technology entities that also lead the individual ranking, pointing to one dominant institutional partnership rather than a wide collaborative network.

Co-assignee pair analysis, 10 pairs total.
Long tail
69 companies
in the ranked field

Most assignees hold very few records

The ranking covers 69 companies in total. With the top ten already accounting for 74.7% of all 146 records, the remaining ranked assignees are mostly single- or double-filing entrants — useful signals of niche activity but not sources of blocking portfolios.

Full ranking as returned by the data endpoint.
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth checking before filing
Small IPC shares and thin recent activity point to specific spaces that are not yet locked down.
shunt-current suppression geometryelectrode felt activation treatmentbipolar plate flow-channel machiningcomputational flow-field optimisationelectrolyte rebalancing at elevated temperature
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Beijing Zhongkaihongde Technology Co., Ltd.0
Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences0
General Electric Company0
United Technologies Corporation0
Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, Inc.0
Hui Kang Life Technology Co., Ltd.0
EnerVault Corporation0
TAPPI MAURIZIO0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design 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

Next steps for an R&D or IP team

The dataset points to where filing has already concentrated and where it has gone quiet. What a team does with that depends on whether it is scouting a chemistry, checking freedom to operate, or looking for a licensing partner.

Check freedom to operate around the leader's claims

With one assignee holding 22 records and the top five holding half of all 146, a new stack or flow-field filing should start by mapping claim scope against that concentration rather than the field average.

Explore assignee claims in Eureka

Test the under-claimed sub-areas before committing scope

Small IPC shares in catalysis, electrolytic production and computational tooling suggest claim room, but thin data also means fewer prior-art anchors to design against.

Run a white-space search in Eureka

Re-check momentum once the lag clears

Recent years understate true filing activity by roughly 18 months of publication lag. Treat the apparent 2022 slowdown as provisional until later data cuts confirm it.

Track filing trends in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design 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 flow battery stack and flow field design patents

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design 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 Flow Battery Stack and Flow Field Design in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole flow battery stack and flow field design 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.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.