Metal Powder Production Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- One filer dominates. A single assignee holds 38 of 54 records in scope, with the top five combined reaching 88.9% of all records — this is a field with a dominant incumbent, not a fragmented one.
- Powder metallurgy carries the claim weight. B22F appears on 79.6% of the 54 records, with B01J close behind at 50.0% — characterization and process claims cluster on the same handful of subclasses.
- The tail thins out fast. Beyond the top ten assignees (98.1% of all records), almost nothing is left to rank — later entrants file once and do not return.
Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 54 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent filings at the intersection of metal powder atomization and powder characterization — processes that produce metal powder feedstock and the methods used to measure particle size distribution, sphericity, oxygen pickup, flowability and batch-to-batch consistency. The scope spans 54 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from a search string built around atomization process claims and characterization test methods rather than end-use alloy chemistry.
Filing activity peaked in 2024 at 10 records, with the most recent year necessarily undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. Receiving offices skew toward Europe and the United States, with Canada, China, Australia and India each contributing a smaller share — consistent with a technology still concentrated among a small number of production-equipment specialists rather than broadly distributed across manufacturing regions.
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
The two views below show when filings happened and where they sit in the classification system. Both use the full 54-record set as the denominator, so IPC shares add to more than 100% because a single record can carry several classification codes.
A field with a recent, still-forming peak
Filings sat near zero through 2017 and built up to a peak of 10 records in 2024. With fewer than four complete years available once publication lag is factored in, no reliable growth rate can be stated — the recent trend line should be read as directional, not quantified.
Powder metallurgy and chemical processing dominate the classification mix
B22F (powder metallurgy) appears on 79.6% of the 54 records and B01J (chemical and physical processes) on 50.0%, meaning most filings sit at the overlap of the two. C22C (alloys) reaches 25.9%, while additive manufacturing (B33Y) and material analysis (G01N) each sit at 9.3% — a much thinner presence than the core process classes.
Shares are the percentage of the 54 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Metal Powder Production and Characterization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about metal powder production and characterization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this landscape
Metal powder atomization manufacturing processes (US20190001416A1)
The filing describes reactive metal powder atomization processes in which a heated metal source is contacted with an additive gas, either directly or mixed into the atomization gas, during atomization. The stated goal is raw reactive metal powder with improved flowability, and the filing also covers reactive metal powder spheroidization processes.Cited 46 times within this corpus, the most of any record in scope.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20190001416A1 | Metal powder atomization manufacturing processes | 46 |
| 2 | WO2017070779A1 | Metal powder atomization manufacturing processes | 24 |
| 3 | US4912078A | Method and structure for forming magnesia alumina spinels | 20 |
| 4 | CN108367361A | 金属粉末雾化制造方法 | 10 |
| 5 | CA3003502A1 | Metal powder atomization manufacturing processes | 5 |
| 6 | US20200139621A1 | 3D printed in-process powder capsule for printing material powder characterization | 4 |
| 7 | CA3024473A1 | Metal powder atomization manufacturing processes | 4 |
| 8 | CN112475307A | 一种气雾化制备金属材料粉末的方法及金属粉末雾化装置 | 3 |
| 9 | CN203900491U | 金属熔液流道多级缓冲下料嘴 | 2 |
| 10 | US20240383036A1 | Metal powder atomization manufacturing processes | 1 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and favour older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial importance.
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 filing pattern signals
The numbers point to a technology area shaped by one production-equipment specialist's process claims, with characterization methods filed as supporting rather than standalone inventions.
Claim space is occupied, not shared
With a single leader holding 38 of 54 records and the top five combined reaching 88.9%, this is not a landscape where a newcomer stakes out a novel atomization process without designing around existing claims. High density here signals occupied ground, not necessarily a mature or settled technology.
Process and characterization claims sit together
B22F and B01J together cover the bulk of filings, meaning atomization process claims and the physical/chemical characterization methods used to validate powder quality are frequently bundled into the same families rather than filed as separate inventions.
Europe and the US lead receiving offices
The EPO (15) and the United States (14) receive the largest share of filings, with Canada (8) a distant third. China, Australia and India each register in the single digits, suggesting protection strategy is still concentrated in traditional advanced-manufacturing jurisdictions.
Older atomization filings anchor the citation graph
The most-cited records in this corpus are foundational atomization process filings from the same lineage, cited well ahead of any characterization-specific filing. That pattern is typical of citation counts inside a searched corpus: older filings accumulate citations simply by being available longer.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to metal powder production and characterization, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field opens up
Eleven assignees make up the entire ranked field returned by this dataset — not a top-50 or top-100 cut, but the complete set of organisations with a record in scope. One name accounts for most of the volume; the remainder file rarely and mostly do not return year over year.
One production-equipment specialist sets the pace
The top-ranked assignee alone accounts for 38 of the 54 records in scope, filing consistently across atomization process and powder-quality claims. Recent-year momentum data shows this leader with no new filings in the latest year, alongside most other tracked assignees also showing zero — a sign the whole field's most recent activity is still working through publication lag.
Most other filers appear once
Fifth place in the ranking holds just 1 record, as does tenth place — the field drops off sharply after the leader. This pattern is typical of a technology anchored by one specialist supplier rather than contested by a cluster of comparable-sized competitors.
Latest-year activity is thin and provisional
Only one assignee in the recent-momentum data shows a filing in the latest year; several others that filed previously show zero and a reported year-on-year drop. Given publication lag of roughly 18 months, this latest-year picture will fill in as more records publish — it should not be read as a slowdown yet.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Jinzhou Heli Vacuum Metallurgy Industry Co., Ltd. | 1 | — |
| AP&C Advanced Powders & Coatings | 0 | -100% |
| Ethicon Inc. | 0 | — |
| BLANCO FERNÁNDEZ DAVID | 0 | — |
| RTX Corp (Raytheon Technologies) | 0 | — |
| Chengdu Huici Electronic Materials Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Guangzhou Youyan Powder Materials Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Song Nianfa | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The dataset points to a concentrated field with specific gaps rather than broad open ground. The next steps depend on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate or first-mover filing.
Map the leader's full claim set
With one assignee holding 38 of 54 records, a freedom-to-operate review should start by mapping that portfolio's claim scope in detail before assuming any adjacent process variation is clear.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches
In-line oxygen pickup sensing and satellite-particle suppression sit far below the core B22F/B01J filing density — worth a focused prior-art check before committing R&D spend.
Run a white space search in EurekaTrack the next publication wave
The 2024–2026 filings are still incomplete due to publication lag; revisit the trend once the 2025 cohort clears, to see whether the leader's pace held or a new filer entered.
Set a filing alert in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
One assignee holds 38 of the 54 records in this landscape, making it by far the largest filer in the field. The next four largest assignees combined bring the top five to 88.9% of all records in scope, so filing activity is heavily concentrated rather than spread across many competitors. Anyone assessing freedom-to-operate in this space should start with that leading portfolio before looking at the smaller filers.
B22F, the powder metallurgy classification, covers 79.6% of the 54 records in scope, and B01J (chemical and physical processes) covers 50.0% — the two overlap heavily, meaning atomization process and characterization claims are usually bundled together. Additive manufacturing (B33Y) and material analysis (G01N) each sit at only 9.3%, a much smaller share. This tells a reader where the dense prior art sits and where filings are comparatively rare.
Filing activity rose from effectively zero in 2017 to a peak of 10 records in 2024, but a reliable growth rate cannot be stated because fewer than four complete years remain once publication lag is accounted for. Publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 counts in any dataset will understate real filing activity for those years. Treat the recent trend as directional rather than a fixed number.
US20190001416A1 describes a reactive metal powder atomization process where a heated metal source is contacted with an additive gas, either on its own or mixed into the atomization gas stream, during atomization, aimed at producing powder with improved flowability. It also covers a related spheroidization process for reactive metal powder. It is the most-cited record in this landscape, cited 46 times within the corpus, which reflects its foundational position in the atomization-process citation lineage rather than a statement about its current enforceability.
The classification data shows heavy density in core powder metallurgy and chemical-process claims (B22F, B01J) but much thinner coverage in additive-manufacturing-specific characterization (B33Y, G01N) and force/pressure-based testing (G01L), each near or below 10% of records. Sub-areas such as in-line oxygen pickup sensing and satellite-particle suppression during atomization show comparatively few dedicated filings against the core process art. These lower-density branches are a reasonable starting point for a more detailed prior-art search before committing to a filing strategy.
Research Metal Powder Production and Characterization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole metal powder production and characterization 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.