Book a demo

Heat Pump Drying Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026

Heat Pump Drying Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/heat-pump-drying-and-energy-recovery-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Drying Technology
Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery Patents
  • 57.1% of all 56 records sit with just five assignees, and 92.9% sit with ten — a small group has occupied most of the claim space in this field.
  • Filings peaked in 2024 at 6 in a year with only two full years of prior data, so the trend line is short and any growth-rate claim would be premature.
  • D06F and F26B each cover roughly half the records (50.0% and 44.6%), while F25B heat-pump/refrigeration claims sit under a third — a gap between drying-appliance claims and the thermodynamic core.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
56
Published Records
57%
Top-5 Share of All Records
US
Leading Jurisdiction
26
Active Filers Ranked

Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 56 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

This review covers 56 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine heat pump or closed-loop drying architecture with a specific technical claim — moisture extraction rate, coefficient of performance, condensate handling, refrigerant selection, defrost strategy or drying kinetics. That combination narrows the field to records where the drying cycle and the thermodynamic cycle are claimed together, rather than either one alone.

Filing activity is concentrated among a small set of assignees, with appliance-scale claims (D06F, F26B) outnumbering refrigeration-cycle claims (F25B) inside the same record set. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the 2025-2026 count in the trend chart understates real filing activity for those years.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1SELF PROPELLED RES & DEV SPECIALISTS11
  2. 2WHIRLPOOL CORP6
  3. 3CHANNING STREET COPPER CO5
  4. 4NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE5
  5. 5SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD5
  6. 6MULTIVECTOR4
  7. 7GOLDBERG MICHAEL4
  8. 8TRUMAN JAMES C4
  9. 9FLI HLDG COMPANY4
  10. 10KNIFFIN ALEXANDER B4
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery 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 Data

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 56 records: how filings moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.

Filing trend, 2017-2026

Filings ran at low single digits through most of the period, reaching a peak of 6 in 2024. With fewer than four complete years once publication lag is accounted for, no growth rate can be stated reliably from this trend alone.

Filing trend, 2017-2026023562201720182019202020212022202362024202502026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

IPC subclass composition

D06F (laundering, drying & ironing) and F26B (drying) each appear in roughly half of the 56 records, confirming this is primarily an appliance and drying-process field. F25B (refrigeration & heat pumps) appears in 26.8% of records, and B01D, F24F, F24H, H01M and A47L each cover a smaller slice — these are the adjacent branches, not the core, of most filings.

IPC subclass compositionD06F · Laundering, drying & ironing2850.0%F26B · Drying2544.6%F25B · Refrigeration & heat pumps1526.8%B01D · Separation processes (filtrati…610.7%F24F · Air conditioning & ventilation58.9%F24H · Fluid heaters & water heaters47.1%H01M · Batteries, cells & fuel cells47.1%A47L · Cleaning & washing appliances35.4%Other1323.2%

Shares are the percentage of the 56 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 Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about heat pump drying and energy recovery and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key Patents

Most-cited prior art

Representative filing
SG83109A12001-09-18

SG83109A1 — Two stage heat pump dryer

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

Filed by the National University of Singapore and published in 2001, this record claims a two-stage heat pump drying arrangement — an early example of the staged-cycle approach that recurs across the later, more heavily cited US filings in this dataset.Representative record; number, assignee and date rendered from the underlying data.

View full record
Highest-citation records in scope
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US20050066538A1Heat pump clothes dryer282
2US7055262B2Heat pump clothes dryer207
3US20060179676A1Heat pump clothes dryer148
4US7665225B2Heat pump clothes dryer91
5US7020985B2Multiple outlet air path for a clothes dryer79
6US6164073AMethod and apparatus for adapting steady flow with cyclic thermodynamics51
7WO2005032322A2Heat pump clothes dryer41
8WO2000036344A1A modular heat pump system for drying and air-conditioning29
9JP1990146475Adryer17
10US20050210698A1Multiple outlet air path for a clothes dryer15

Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside the corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a signal of current commercial 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 Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery 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 findings a reader could not get from browsing the raw record list.

Concentration
57.1% held by top 5
of 56 records in scope

A small group holds most of the claim space

Five assignees account for 57.1% of all 56 records, and ten account for 92.9%. That leaves a long tail of single- or double-filing entrants working around a fairly small set of occupied positions.

Top 10 combined = 52 of 56 records
Class split
50.0% vs 26.8%
D06F share vs F25B share of 56 records

Appliance claims outnumber refrigeration-cycle claims

D06F (drying appliances) appears in half of all records while F25B (refrigeration & heat pump cycles) appears in barely more than a quarter. Filers are more often claiming the dryer mechanism than the thermodynamic cycle inside it.

Record can carry multiple IPC classes; shares do not sum to 100%
Citations
282 citations
on the most-cited record

Early US heat pump dryer filings anchor the citation graph

The five most-cited records in this dataset are all early heat pump clothes dryer filings, one carrying 282 citations. Their influence on later drafting is clear, but citation age means they say more about historical framing than present-day white space.

Citation counts favour older records in any searched corpus
Geography
17 US filings
of receiving-office totals given

US filings lead receiving offices, EPO and Japan follow

United States filings (17) outnumber EPO (8), Japan (5), WIPO/PCT (5), Australia (3) and Canada (3) among the receiving offices captured here, suggesting the US is the primary contested jurisdiction for this technology.

Receiving-office counts as given in the underlying data
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 heat pump drying and energy recovery, 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 Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery 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 leader in this dataset holds 11 records; fifth place holds 5, tenth place holds 4 — the ranking drops off quickly after the top few names, into a long tail of one- and two-record filers.

Leader
11 records
held by the top-ranked assignee

One assignee sits well ahead of the field

The leading assignee in this 26-company ranking holds 11 of the 56 records in scope, more than double the fifth-place count of 5. That gap suggests a sustained filing programme rather than opportunistic single filings.

Ranking covers 26 companies total, not a top-50 or top-100 list
Mid-field
5 vs 4 records
fifth place vs tenth place

The mid-field is tightly bunched

Between fifth place (5 records) and tenth place (4 records) the gap is a single filing, meaning several assignees are clustered at a similar filing intensity just below the leader.

Top 10 combined = 92.9% of all 56 records
Co-filing
10 co-assignee pairs
identified across the dataset

A small cluster of individual co-inventors files together repeatedly

Three of the strongest co-assignee pairs in the dataset share the same three names, each pairing appearing together on 4 records — a tight, repeat collaboration rather than a one-off joint filing.

Strongest pairs each co-appear on 4 records
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth checking before filing
Branches where record counts are thin relative to the core drying and refrigeration classes.
condensate reuse in closed-loop cyclesbattery-integrated heat pump drying (H01M overlap)defrost-strategy claims specific to dryersrefrigerant selection for low-GWP dryer cyclescleaning-appliance dehumidification (A47L overlap)
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
SELF PROPELLED RES & DEV SPECIALISTS0
Whirlpool Corp0
Channing Street Copper Co0
National University of Singapore0
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.0
Multivector0
TRUMAN JAMES C0
KNIFFIN ALEXANDER B0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery 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 from here

The dataset points to a few concrete next steps for a team deciding where to file or where to design around existing claims.

Check the F25B gap before drafting

With F25B present in only 26.8% of records against D06F's 50.0%, claims that tie a specific refrigeration-cycle parameter to drying performance may face less crowded prior art than appliance-mechanism claims.

Explore F25B claim space

Map the top-10 assignees' active families

Since ten assignees hold 92.9% of all 56 records, freedom-to-operate work should start with those families rather than the long tail, which contributes little coverage individually.

Review leading assignees

Treat 2025-2026 counts as provisional

Publication lag means recent-year filing counts, including the 2024 peak of 6, will revise upward as later publications land — re-check the trend before drawing conclusions about slowing activity.

Track filing trend updates
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery 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 heat pump drying patents

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery 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 Heat Pump Drying and Energy Recovery in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole heat pump drying and energy recovery 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.