In-Space Additive Manufacturing Patents: Who Leads, Gaps 2026
- Concentration at the top: the top 5 assignees hold 28 of 44 records in scope (63.6%), and the top 10 hold 86.4% — a short list controls most of the filed claim space.
- Filing growth of +125%: annual filings rose from 4 in 2021 to 9 in 2024, the last year the record can be treated as complete, with 2022 as the peak year so far at 9 filings.
- Structural claims dominate: B64G (cosmonautics & spacecraft) touches 43.2% of records, while sheet-metal working (B21D) sits at just 6.8% — a visible gap next to the crowded structural and coating classes.
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 44 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape maps patent activity at the intersection of on-orbit manufacturing and in-space servicing and assembly — technologies aimed at building, printing, or fabricating spacecraft structures and components after launch rather than on the ground. The scope spans microgravity additive manufacturing, orbital 3D printing, and the servicing and assembly systems that depend on it, drawn from 44 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026.
Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent filing years in any trend chart are undercounts by construction, not evidence of a slowdown. The dataset is small enough that individual assignees move the ranking meaningfully, which is itself informative about how concentrated this field still is.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 44-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filings accelerated through the early 2020s
Filings grew from 4 in 2021 to 9 in 2024 (+125%), with 2022 standing as the peak year so far at 9 filings. Years after 2024 will continue to fill in as publication catches up, so treat the tail of the chart as a floor, not a ceiling.
Structural and coating classes lead; sheet-metal working lags
B64G (cosmonautics & spacecraft) appears in 43.2% of the 44 records, followed by shaping of plastics (B29C, 25.0%) and additive manufacturing proper (B33Y, 22.7%). Spraying/atomising and coating processes each sit at 20.5%, powder metallurgy and polymer processing at 15.9%, and sheet-metal working at just 6.8% — since a record can carry several classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be summed.
Shares are the percentage of the 44 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on In-Space Servicing, Assembly & Manufacturing — Additive Manufacturing in Microgravity Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about in-space servicing, assembly & manufacturing — additive manufacturing in microgravity patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in the corpus
Space assembly system based on fusion of on-orbit additive manufacturing and ground-based launch
Filed by Xiangtan University, this 2023 application describes a space assembly system that pairs on-orbit additive manufacturing of spacecraft structural components with enabling modules launched from the ground, coordinated through a physical subsystem, a digital twin subsystem, and a communication subsystem to assemble a target spacecraft.Abstract condensed from the published filing.
View full filing| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US4582731A | Supercritical fluid molecular spray film deposition and powder formation | 368 |
| 2 | US4734227A | Method of making supercritical fluid molecular spray films, powder and fibers | 306 |
| 3 | US4734451A | Supercritical fluid molecular spray thin films and fine powders | 261 |
| 4 | US20150210408A1 | Spacecraft Having Electronic Components As Structural Members And Related Methods | 40 |
| 5 | WO1985000993A1 | Supercritical fluid molecular spray film deposition and powder formation | 32 |
| 6 | US5271702A | Robotic substrate manipulator | 14 |
| 7 | US20240328674A1 | Systems and methods for manufacturing in space environments | 6 |
| 8 | US20220219839A1 | In space assembly | 5 |
| 9 | EP0157827A1 | Supercritical fluid molecular spray film deposition and powder formation | 5 |
| 10 | US10640237B2 | Spacecraft having electronic components as structural members and related methods | 3 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate references; read them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not as a measure of current technical importance.
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 mean for a filing decision
Three figures worth acting on before drafting a claim in this space.
A short list of assignees controls most of the filed space
The top 5 assignees account for 28 of the 44 records in scope, and the top 10 account for 38 — 86.4% of everything published in this search. A field this small with concentration this high means a new entrant is more likely to be designing around an existing claim than filing into open ground, particularly in the structural and coating classes.
Growth is real but recent-year counts understate it further
Filings rose from 4 in 2021 to 9 in 2024, the last year that can be treated as complete given an ~18-month publication lag. 2022 is the peak year so far at 9 filings; whether 2025–2026 exceed that will not be visible in the data for some time yet.
Spacecraft-structure claims are dense; sheet-metal working is thin
B64G (cosmonautics & spacecraft) touches 43.2% of records, making it the busiest single class in this landscape, while sheet-metal working (B21D) appears in only 6.8%. Powder metallurgy and polymer processing sit in the middle at 15.9% each — worth checking before assuming a powder-based or polymer route is uncrowded.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to in-space servicing, assembly & manufacturing — additive manufacturing in microgravity patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
The assignee landscape
Sixteen assignees make up the entire ranked list this search returns — not a top-50 or top-100 cut, but the whole field as captured here. The leader holds 8 records; by fifth place that has fallen to 3, and by tenth place to 2, which is the shape of a field with one clear leader and a long tail of single- and double-filing entrants.
One assignee sets the pace
The top-ranked assignee holds 8 of the 44 records in scope, roughly double the count at fifth place. That gap suggests a single organisation has invested early and consistently rather than the field being led by a recent single large filing.
The middle of the ranking thins out quickly
By fifth place, assignee counts drop to 3 records, and by tenth place to 2. Government and university-affiliated research bodies sit alongside newer commercial space entrants in this band, reflecting a field still forming its commercial base.
Momentum has cooled for several established filers
Several of the assignees that built the early lead show zero filings in the latest year, including one with a -100% year-on-year change. Given the publication lag, this is as likely to reflect filings still working through the pipeline as an actual pullback.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Battelle Memorial Institute | 0 | — |
| OPTERUS RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT INC | 0 | — |
| Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR) | 0 | — |
| TRANS ASTRONAUTICA CORP | 0 | -100% |
| Ohio State Innovation Foundation | 0 | — |
| Made In Space, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Xiangtan University | 0 | — |
| Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The dataset points to specific next steps rather than a general read of the field.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top 5
With 63.6% of all records held by five assignees, any commercial program in structural on-orbit fabrication should map its intended claims against that concentrated set before drafting.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaWatch the 2024–2026 filing window closely
The peak year so far is 2022, but the +125% growth from 2021 to 2024 and the publication lag mean the true 2025–2026 picture is still forming.
Track filing trends in EurekaProbe the under-claimed branches directly
Sheet-metal working and powder-feedstock handling in microgravity show thinner claim density than structural and coating classes — worth a targeted search before committing R&D there.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
This search returns a ranked list of 16 assignees covering all 44 published records in scope. It is not a top-50 or top-100 cut — it is the entire field as captured by this search string. The leader holds 8 records, and the ranking thins quickly after that, with fifth place at 3 and tenth place at 2, so a handful of organisations account for most of the activity while the rest file once or twice.
Filings grew from 4 in 2021 to 9 in 2024, a +125% increase over that span, with 2022 standing as the peak year so far at 9 filings. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the counts for 2025 and 2026 in any chart are undercounts rather than a genuine slowdown. Treat the most recent one to two years as still filling in before drawing conclusions about direction.
B64G, covering cosmonautics and spacecraft, appears in 43.2% of the 44 records and is the busiest single class in this landscape, followed by shaping of plastics (B29C, 25.0%) and additive manufacturing proper (B33Y, 22.7%). Spraying and coating classes each sit around 20.5%, and sheet-metal working is comparatively thin at 6.8%. Since records often carry multiple classes, a serious clearance search should cover several of these together rather than just the class that names the technology outright.
That filing, from Xiangtan University, describes a space assembly system combining on-orbit additive manufacturing of structural components with ground-launched enabling modules, coordinated through physical, digital-twin and communication subsystems. It is a representative example of how claims in this field are being drafted around system-level integration rather than a single manufacturing step. Anyone designing a comparable orbital assembly workflow should review its specific claim language before assuming their architecture is clear of it.
The clearest gaps sit next to the crowded classes rather than far from them: sheet-metal working in orbital structures (B21D) is filed at only 6.8% of records compared with 43.2% for spacecraft structures generally, and powder metallurgy and polymer processing each sit around 15.9%. Digital-twin coordination for on-orbit assembly also shows thinner claim density than the structural classes it supports. These branches have documented activity but not the density seen in the leading classes, which makes them worth a closer look before ruling them out or in.
Research In-Space Servicing, Assembly & Manufacturing — Additive Manufacturing in Microgravity Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole in-space servicing, assembly & manufacturing — additive manufacturing in microgravity patent landscape 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.