Machine Tool Geometric Error Patents: Who Leads, Trends 2026
- Concentrated but not locked up. The top 5 assignees hold 54.5% of all 22 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 77.3% — a dense core with a long single-filer tail behind it.
- Filing has plateaued, not fallen. Volume rose to a peak of 6 records in 2022, then held flat: 2021 and 2024 both sit at 2 records, a 0% span once publication lag is accounted for.
- Filed almost entirely through one office. 21 of 22 records were filed in China against a single WIPO/PCT filing, meaning most of this prior art was never tested outside a single jurisdiction's examiners.
Filing growth compares 2021 (2 records) with 2024 (2) — 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 22 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent filings on geometric error identification, measurement and compensation for machine tools — the methods used to model, measure and correct volumetric and rotary-axis errors using tools such as laser interferometers, ballbar tests and multi-body error models. The scope spans 22 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from a search string anchored on machine tool geometric error and volumetric error calibration terms, cross-referenced against measurement and compensation method claims.
Most activity sits inside university and research-institute filings rather than machine tool OEMs, which shapes how the field reads: dense method claims on error modelling and identification, thinner coverage on productised compensation hardware. The IPC composition below shows where those claims land across mechanical fittings, control systems and data processing classes.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 22-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across the IPC subclasses that define the technical approach.
Filing trend, 2015–2026
Filings rose to a peak of 6 records in 2022 before settling back; 2021 and 2024 both register 2 records, a flat span once the most recent, still-incomplete years are set aside — publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 figures will rise as more records publish.
IPC subclass composition
B23Q (machine tool fittings) covers 45.5% of the 22 records, followed by G05B (control and regulating systems) at 40.9% and G06F (data processing) at 27.3%; G01B (length and dimension measurement) accounts for a narrow 4.5%. Records can carry multiple classes, so these shares sum to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 22 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Geometric Error Calibration of Machine Tools with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about geometric error calibration of machine tools and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited prior art and a recent filing
WO2025118735A1 — geometric error identification via an improved nine-line method
Filed by Guangdong Ocean University, this application builds a composite error model from multi-body kinematic theory and machine tool topology, then uses it to search for optimal measurement positions. Identification equations are built at each optimal position and solved via simulation; the method varies the combination of identification equations to densify the measurement trajectory without adding extra measurement passes, using an adaptive genetic algorithm to search the simulated error field for the positions with least impact on identification accuracy.Abstract condensed from the original filing language for readability.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CN103878641A | 一种五轴数控机床通用的旋转轴几何误差辨识方法 | 58 |
| 2 | CN109522643A | 数控机床精度分配多目标优化方法 | 15 |
| 3 | CN111872748A | 一种基于球杆仪的机床几何误差测量方法 | 11 |
| 4 | CN114036685A | 一种基于多体理论的超精密磨抛机床几何误差与力致误差耦合误差模型建立方法 | 6 |
| 5 | CN115847189A | 一种基于激光干涉仪测量的多轴机床几何误差辨识方法 | 5 |
| 6 | CN115145223A | 双摆台五轴机床旋转轴几何误差和热误差解耦方法及测量装置 | 5 |
| 7 | CN120447466A | 一种考虑机床几何误差的螺旋锥齿轮齿面误差补偿方法 | 2 |
| 8 | CN117348518A | 一种基于改进九线法的数控机床几何误差辨识方法及装置 | 2 |
| 9 | CN117420791A | 一种考虑装夹变形的微球靶铣削加工机床几何误差建模方法 | 2 |
| 10 | CN115847190A | 一种基于对偶四元数的机床几何误差建模方法 | 2 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations within this corpus; treat them as a signal of influence on the field, not as a measure 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.
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 say about this field
Three findings shape how a competitive or freedom-to-operate review of this space should be scoped.
A dense core, not a monopoly
The top 5 assignees combine for 12 of the 22 records in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 17 — 77.3% of the field. That leaves a genuine but thin long tail of single-filing entrants rather than a wide-open field.
Plateau after a 2022 peak
Filing volume peaked at 6 records in 2022 before settling back to the 2-record level seen in both 2021 and 2024 — flat over that three-year span. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025–2026 counts are still incomplete and should not be read as a decline.
A single-office field
Only one record in this dataset went through the WIPO/PCT route; the remaining 21 were filed in China. Prior art here has mostly been examined by one office, which matters for anyone assessing novelty risk in other jurisdictions.
Mechanical fittings lead, software trails
B23Q (machine tool fittings) and G05B (control systems) together anchor most filings, with G06F (data processing) present in about a quarter of records. G01B, the measurement-instrument class, appears in only 4.5% — a narrow slice given how central measurement is to the field's premise.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to geometric error calibration of machine tools, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
Filing here is led by universities and research institutes rather than machine tool manufacturers, with recent-year momentum flat across the named assignees tracked below.
A university-led leader
The top-ranked assignee holds 4 of the 22 records, with fifth place at 2 and tenth place at just 1 — a leader with modest absolute volume rather than a dominant portfolio.
Momentum has cooled across the board
Recent-year momentum for the named assignees shows 0 filings in the latest tracked year across the group, including one assignee down -100% year-on-year from a prior filing. This reads as a lull consistent with publication lag rather than an exit from the space.
Collaboration is rare
Only one co-assignee pairing appears in this dataset, a single joint filing between a precision-machinery firm and a university. Most records here are filed solely, with little sign of formal cross-institution or industry-academia co-filing.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Tianjin University | 0 | -100% |
| Zhejiang University | 0 | — |
| Yangzhou University | 0 | — |
| Guangdong Ocean University | 0 | — |
| Harbin Institute of Technology | 0 | — |
| Beijing University of Technology | 0 | — |
| Changsha Halianng Kaishuai Precision Machinery Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Chongqing University | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape points to a field with an occupied core and a thin, specific set of open branches. Two directions follow from that.
Map claim scope against the leading assignees' portfolios
With 54.5% of records held by five assignees, a freedom-to-operate check should start with their specific claim language on error modelling and identification before assuming open space.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaStress-test the under-claimed branches
Thin coverage in areas like recalibration scheduling or thermal-geometric coupling does not guarantee patentability — it may reflect technical difficulty. Validate against the full claim text before filing.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
The leading assignee in this dataset holds 4 of the 22 records in scope, with the top 5 assignees combined holding 12 records — 54.5% of the field. The ranking is dominated by universities and research institutes rather than machine tool manufacturers, which is typical for a field still centred on error modelling and identification methods rather than productised compensation hardware. Fifth place holds 2 records and tenth place holds just 1, showing the concentration drops off quickly outside the leading group.
Filing peaked at 6 records in 2022 and has since settled to a lower, flat level — 2021 and 2024 both show 2 records, a 0% change over that span. Because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any trend chart are understated and should not be read as a real decline. The honest read is a plateau after a 2022 spike, not a slowdown.
Machine tool fittings (IPC class B23Q) appear in 45.5% of the 22 records, control and regulating systems (G05B) in 40.9%, and data processing methods (G06F) in 27.3%. Measurement instrumentation itself (G01B) appears in only 4.5% of records, a narrow slice considering how central laser interferometer and ballbar measurement are to the field's premise. Since records often carry multiple classes, these figures overlap rather than sum to 100%.
Based on this dataset, under-claimed branches include rotary-axis squareness compensation hardware, automated recalibration-interval scheduling, and thermal-geometric error coupling models — areas with thin representation relative to the volume of general error-identification method claims. That thinness could reflect either open opportunity or genuine technical difficulty, so it should be checked against full claim text rather than assumed to be simply unclaimed. G01B's narrow 4.5% share is a useful starting signal for where instrumentation-integrated claims remain sparse.
Of the 22 records in scope, 21 were filed in China and only 1 through the WIPO/PCT route. This reflects the assignee base, which is heavily weighted toward Chinese universities and research institutes rather than multinational machine tool OEMs that typically file across multiple jurisdictions. For freedom-to-operate purposes, this means most of the prior art here has only been examined by a single national office, so novelty conclusions may not transfer cleanly to other jurisdictions.
Research Geometric Error Calibration of Machine Tools in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole geometric error calibration of machine tools 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.