Investment Casting Shell Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- 34.4% of all 672 records sit with the top five assignees, but the leader alone holds 87 records — well ahead of fifth place at 23.
- Filings fell -88% from 16 in 2021 to 2 in 2024, the last year the dataset treats as complete.
- B22C foundry moulding covers 61.8% of records, while additive manufacturing (B33Y) sits at just 5.5% — a narrow but active edge of the field.
Filing growth compares 2021 (16 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 672 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Investment casting shell and core technology spans the ceramic slurry, stucco layer, dewaxing and core leaching steps that turn a wax pattern into a metal casting with controlled dimensional accuracy. The dataset in scope pulls 672 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine language on shell or lost-wax processes with process-control terms such as slurry viscosity, shell permeability and core leaching. That combination narrows the field to process and materials claims rather than general casting or turbine-blade design.
Filing activity is concentrated in foundry moulding and refractory ceramics classes, with a smaller but persistent presence in additive manufacturing — a signal that 3D-printed pattern and core work is being claimed as an extension of, not a replacement for, the traditional shell process.
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 mix
Two views of the same 672 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
A peak in 2019, then a steady decline
Filings peaked at 30 in 2019 and had fallen to 2 by 2024, an -88% drop from the 2021 level of 16. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in and should not be read as confirmation that filing has stopped.
Foundry moulding dominates, additive manufacturing is a minority signal
B22C (foundry moulding) appears in 61.8% of the 672 records, more than three times the next largest class, C04B ceramics and refractories at 19.0%. B33Y additive manufacturing and B23P general metal working each sit at 5.5%, marking the smaller but technically distinct edges of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 672 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Investment Casting Shell and Core Technology with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about investment casting shell and core technology and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA representative shell-binder patent
Investment Casting Shell Binders and Compositions (US20210178458A1)
Investment casting shell composition binders comprising hydrophilic fibrils having an average diameter between about 1 nm and about less than 1 micrometre can be used for the preparation of investment casting shell compositions or slurries. The investment casting shell binders and compositions can be used in an investment casting process to produce investment casting shells with improved shell build thickness and strength.Filed by Remet Corporation, published 2021-06-17.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20110189440A1 | Systems, Devices, and/or Methods for Manufacturing Castings | 289 |
| 2 | US5284695A | Method of producing high-temperature parts by way of low-temperature sintering | 259 |
| 3 | US9315663B2 | Systems, devices, and/or methods for manufacturing castings | 201 |
| 4 | US5295530A | Single-cast, high-temperature, thin wall structures and methods of making the same | 182 |
| 5 | US7077867B1 | Prosthetic knee joint having at least one diamond articulation surface | 137 |
| 6 | US6626230B1 | Multi-wall core and process | 134 |
| 7 | US20030019106A1 | Methods for making bearings, races and components thereof having diamond and other superhard surfaces | 130 |
| 8 | US6709463B1 | Prosthetic joint component having at least one solid polycrystalline diamond component | 113 |
| 9 | US5545003A | Single-cast, high-temperature thin wall gas turbine component | 111 |
| 10 | US4703806A | Ceramic shell mold facecoat and core coating systems for investment casting of reactive metals | 101 |
Citation counts reward older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within this corpus; treat them as a signal of influence, not of current commercial relevance.
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 or freedom-to-operate decision
Three patterns stand out once family counts, IPC mix and the filing trend are read together.
A clear leader, then a long tail
The leading assignee holds 87 records on its own, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 23. Combined with the top ten holding 47.8% of all records, the field has one dominant filer surrounded by a wide field of smaller, single- or few-filing entrants rather than several evenly matched competitors.
Volume has cooled from its 2019 peak
Annual filings peaked at 30 in 2019 and dropped to 2 by 2024, the last year the dataset treats as complete. That decline sits alongside — not necessarily caused by — publication lag on the two most recent years, which are still filling in.
Additive manufacturing is a minority claim area
B33Y (additive manufacturing) and B23P (general metal working) each appear in only 5.5% of records, against 61.8% for B22C foundry moulding. That gap suggests 3D-printed cores and patterns are still claimed as adjuncts to conventional shell processes rather than as a separate filing category.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to investment casting shell and core technology, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee concentration and where activity has gone quiet
A small number of assignees hold a disproportionate share of records, but recent-year filing counts across the named leaders have dropped to zero, consistent with the broader post-2021 decline.
One filer well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 87 of the 672 records in scope, close to four times the count at fifth place (23). No other assignee approaches that volume, making this less a multi-player race than a single dominant filer with a wide field behind it.
Recent-year filing has gone quiet at the top
Every one of the leading assignees tracked for recent-year momentum shows zero filings in the latest year. That is consistent with the overall -88% drop from 2021 to 2024, though the most recent one to two years are still incomplete in any patent dataset.
Collaboration is limited and small-scale
Only nine co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, the strongest recurring at two shared filings each. Co-filing is not a major feature of this field; most records carry a single corporate assignee.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| General Electric Co | 0 | — |
| Howmet Research Corporation | 0 | — |
| Howmet Corporation | 0 | — |
| Nalco Co | 0 | — |
| Microsystems Ltd | 0 | — |
| United Technologies Corp | 0 | — |
| Rolls-Royce plc | 0 | — |
| Diamicron Inc | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a concentrated leader, a cooling filing trend, and a handful of under-claimed process branches. The next step is usually to test a specific claim idea or a specific competitor against the full record set.
Check freedom-to-operate on a specific process step
Slurry formulation, stucco layer application and core leaching each carry distinct claim clusters. Running a targeted search against the leading assignee's full portfolio before drafting narrows risk early.
Explore in Patsnap Eureka →Track the leader's recent filing behaviour
Zero recent-year filings across the named leaders may reflect publication lag rather than a real pullback. Monitoring newly published families as they post is the only way to confirm the trend.
Set up monitoring in Patsnap Eureka →Scope a claim in the additive-manufacturing overlap
B33Y sits at just 5.5% of records, alongside a dominant B22C share. That gap is worth testing against a specific 3D-printed core or pattern concept before assuming it is open.
Draft and search in Patsnap Eureka →Questions practitioners ask about this field
One assignee holds 87 of the 672 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 23 records. The top five combined account for 34.4% of all records, and the top ten for 47.8%, so the field has one dominant filer surrounded by a long tail of smaller entrants. This concentration pattern matters for freedom-to-operate work: a search against the leader's full portfolio typically covers a meaningful share of the relevant prior art before looking further afield.
Filing peaked at 30 records in 2019 and had fallen to 2 by 2024, an -88% drop from the 2021 level of 16. That said, patent publication lags actual filing by roughly 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in any dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as proof the technology is winding down. The safest reading is that filing has cooled from its 2019 peak through the last complete year of data, 2024.
B22C, foundry moulding, appears in 61.8% of the 672 records in scope, making it by far the largest single class. C04B ceramics and refractories (19.0%), B22D metal casting (18.2%) and B28B shaping of clay and cement products (16.1%) follow some distance behind. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100%, and they should be read as overlap density rather than a strict ranking of separate categories.
The clearest under-claimed area by class share is additive manufacturing: B33Y appears in only 5.5% of the 672 records, alongside a dominant 61.8% share for conventional B22C foundry moulding claims. That gap suggests 3D-printed pattern and core work is still being claimed as an adjunct to traditional shell processes rather than as its own filing category. Core leaching chemistry, dewaxing autoclave cycle control and shell permeability tuning for thin-wall castings also show thinner filing density relative to the dominant slurry and stucco-layer clusters.
US20210178458A1, filed by Remet Corporation and published 2021-06-17, covers investment casting shell binders and compositions built on hydrophilic fibrils with an average diameter between roughly 1 nanometre and just under 1 micrometre. The claims center on using these fibril-based binders in shell slurries to improve shell build thickness and strength. Anyone developing a new binder chemistry for investment casting shells should check the specific fibril diameter range and hydrophilic-fibril limitation against their formulation before assuming clearance.
Research Investment Casting Shell and Core Technology in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole investment casting shell and core technology 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.