Magnetic Gears & Couplings Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing has flattened since its 2021 peak. 27 records that year against just 1 filed so far in the most recent year — though publication lag of roughly 18 months means the latest year is always undercounted.
- The field is concentrated but not locked up. The top 5 assignees hold 27.4% of all 212 records and the top 10 hold 44.8% — meaning more than half of the field sits with a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants.
- Almost every filing touches electric machine design. 92.9% of records carry an H02K classification, while only 19.8% also carry F16H gearing — most contactless torque transmission work is being claimed as motor architecture, not mechanical gearing.
What the magnetic gear and coupling patent record shows
Magnetic gears and magnetic couplings transmit torque across an air gap using modulated magnetic fields instead of meshing teeth, which removes lubrication needs and allows hermetic separation between drive and load. The dataset covers 212 published records filed between 2015 and 2026 and classified under F16H49, H02K49 and F16D27 — the gearing, electric-machine-coupling and clutch/coupling subclasses that together define this niche.
Filing rose steadily through the late 2010s, peaked in 2021, and has since eased back toward its 2017 level, a pattern consistent with a technology that has moved past its initial claim rush into a more selective filing phase.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 212 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filing trend: rise, peak, plateau
Annual filings climbed from 11 in 2017 to a peak of 27 in 2021, with the 2022 midpoint at 20 signalling a field that had already begun to level off before any decline. The final year in the chart is partial because publication trails filing by around 18 months, so recent-year counts should not be read as a drop-off in R&D activity.
Where the claims sit
H02K (electric motors and generators) appears in 92.9% of the 212 records, making it the dominant classification by a wide margin; F16H (gearing and transmissions) follows at 19.8%. Smaller clusters in F04D pumps, D06F laundry equipment, H02P motor control, F04C rotary pumps, B25F power tools and E21B drilling each account for under 5% of records, marking the specific end-applications where magnetic coupling has been claimed outside the core electric-machine space.
Shares are the percentage of the 212 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Magnetic Gears and Magnetic Couplings with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about magnetic gears and magnetic couplings and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited prior art and a representative filing
GB2590863A — Disc-type magnetic gear using flux-focusing flux modulation apparatus
Filed by Jiangsu University, this 2021 record claims a disc-type magnetic gear built from driving and driven disc assemblies plus a flux-gathering modulation assembly. The modulation block uses a half-period sine-sided, approximately isosceles-trapezoid cross-section, combined with a specific mechanical mounting arrangement intended to improve reliability over prior flux-modulation designs.Abstract condensed from the original filing for readability.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20120194021A1 | Magnetic gear | 42 |
| 2 | CN106787609A | 一种高转矩密度的磁场调制型磁力齿轮 | 28 |
| 3 | US20130320795A1 | Magnetic Gear Mechanism | 28 |
| 4 | US20180062490A1 | Induction machine with integrated magnetic gear and related methods | 27 |
| 5 | US8482171B2 | Magnetic gear arrangement | 23 |
| 6 | US20160359441A1 | A magnetic gear system and method for reducing transmission of torque pulsation | 21 |
| 7 | US20130002076A1 | Magnetic gear mechanism | 21 |
| 8 | WO2007144556A1 | Magnetic gear | 20 |
| 9 | US20160241123A1 | Magnetic gear device | 17 |
| 10 | WO2015053005A1 | 磁気歯車装置 | 17 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and favour older filings; they are a signal of which prior art shaped later claims, not of which patents are currently most valuable.
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 mean for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once family counts, classes and geography are put side by side.
Leadership is real but not exclusive
The top 5 assignees combined account for 27.4% of all 212 records and the top 10 for 44.8%. That leaves more than half the field to 75 other ranked assignees, most filing only a handful of records each — a long tail rather than a closed market.
Motor-integration claims dominate mechanical-gearing claims
Records carrying H02K outnumber those carrying F16H by more than four to one. Applicants are overwhelmingly framing magnetic torque transmission as electric-machine architecture, which shifts where prior art searches and freedom-to-operate checks need to focus.
The rush has passed its peak
Volume rose from 11 in 2017 to a peak of 27 in 2021, then eased toward flat by the 2022 midpoint of 20. Combined with several leading assignees showing zero filings in the latest tracked year, this points to a technology in a consolidation phase rather than an expansion phase.
Filing is split across three major offices
China leads with 71 records, followed by the United States at 51 and the EPO at 38, with WIPO, India and Japan trailing. Any freedom-to-operate review needs to clear all three major offices rather than assuming a single jurisdiction covers the field.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to magnetic gears and magnetic couplings, with the prior art for and against each one.
Leading assignees and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders span industrial conglomerates, universities and specialist magnetic-gear firms, but recent-year momentum has cooled even among the largest filers.
A single leader, then a fast drop-off
The top-ranked assignee holds 14 records, with fifth place at 10 and tenth place at 6 — a steep early drop that flattens into the long tail of the remaining 75 ranked assignees.
Established filers have gone quiet recently
Multiple assignees that built substantial portfolios earlier in the period show zero filings in the latest tracked year, consistent with the field-wide plateau rather than exits by any single firm.
Collaboration is limited but concentrated
Only 7 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest links tied to one university partnering separately with a university system board, a hybrid-vehicle firm and a defence research lab — signalling applied, funding-linked co-development rather than broad industry consortia.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Rolls-Royce plc | 0 | — |
| Jiangsu University | 0 | — |
| Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. | 0 | — |
| LG Electronics Inc. | 0 | — |
| Magnomatics Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Proterial, Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Agilent Technologies, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Huazhong University of Science and Technology | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, white-space filing, or tracking a competitor.
Check freedom-to-operate against the cited core
The five most-cited records, several dating to the early 2010s, still anchor claim language across the field. Any new filing in flux-modulation or coaxial magnetic gear design should be checked against these before drafting.
Explore citation networkTest claims in the under-claimed branches
Pump, laundry, drilling and hand-tool applications each carry under 5% of records despite clear torque-transmission use cases. These are candidates for narrower, application-specific claims with less prior art to design around.
Run a white-space searchTrack leaders with cooling momentum
Several top assignees show zero filings in the latest year. Confirming whether this reflects a strategic pause, a shift to trade secret, or genuine disengagement matters for anyone planning to file into their claim space.
Monitor assignee activityCommon questions on magnetic gear and coupling patents
This dataset identifies 212 published records filed between 2015 and 2026 under IPC classes F16H49, H02K49 and F16D27, which cover gearing, electric-machine coupling and clutch/coupling technology respectively. The true worldwide figure will be somewhat higher, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent year in any count is understated. Patent families, rather than raw document counts, are the fairer unit for comparing activity across jurisdictions because they neutralise duplicate filings of the same invention.
The ranking covers 85 assignees, with the leader holding 14 records and the field dropping off quickly after that — fifth place holds 10 and tenth place holds 6. The top 5 assignees combined account for 27.4% of all 212 records and the top 10 account for 44.8%, leaving the majority of the field to a long tail of smaller filers including universities and specialist firms. Several of the largest historical filers show no filings in the most recent tracked year, suggesting the leadership picture may be shifting.
Filing volume rose from 11 records in 2017 to a peak of 27 in 2021, then eased toward flat with 20 records at the 2022 midpoint. That pattern points to a technology that passed through an initial claim rush and has since settled into a steadier, more selective filing phase rather than one in early growth or in decline. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the low count in the most recent year overstates any slowdown and should not be read as the field going cold.
In this dataset, F16H49 covers magnetic gearing as a mechanical transmission concept, while H02K49 covers magnetic couplings and gears integrated into electric machine structures, and F16D27 covers magnetic clutches and couplings as a torque-transmission component. In practice, 92.9% of the 212 records carry an H02K classification against 19.8% for F16H, showing that most applicants are claiming magnetic torque transmission as part of motor or generator design rather than as a standalone mechanical gearbox.
The core H02K electric-machine cluster and F16H gearing cluster are the most heavily claimed areas, but several application branches carry under 5% of the 212 records each — including non-positive-displacement pumps, laundry equipment, motor control strategies, rotary-piston pumps, power hand tools and drilling equipment. These lower-density branches are worth checking for narrower, application-specific claims, particularly where a contactless torque transmission benefit such as hermetic separation has not yet been claimed for that specific end use.
Research Magnetic Gears and Magnetic Couplings in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole magnetic gears and magnetic couplings 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.