Nitrocellulose Manufacturing Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing has cooled sharply since its 2017 peak of 21 and by the 2022 midpoint had fallen to just 3, pointing to a mature, largely settled claim structure rather than an active filing race.
- Explosives and propellant claims (C06B) dominate at 506 of 634 records, with polysaccharide chemistry (C08B, 161 records) the only other subclass carrying real volume.
- The United States and United Kingdom together account for 371 of the tracked receiving-office filings, well ahead of Europe, Russia, Japan and Canada combined.
Filing growth compares 2021 (7 records) with 2024 (5) — 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 634 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the nitrocellulose patent record actually covers
Nitrocellulose sits at the intersection of energetic-materials chemistry and industrial polymer processing, and the patent record reflects that split. Most of the 634 families tracked here claim nitration process control, stabiliser chemistry or viscosity-grade specification under C06B explosives and propellant classifications, while a smaller but persistent stream files under C08B polysaccharide derivatives, treating nitrocellulose as a cellulose-ester product rather than an energetic one. Those two framings rarely overlap in the same filing, which is itself informative for anyone drafting claims that try to bridge propellant performance and industrial-grade specification in one document.
Filing activity peaked in 2017 and has declined since, with the 2022 midpoint down to a handful of filings. Because publication typically lags filing by around eighteen months, the most recent years in the trend understate true activity, but the multi-year decline through the middle of the window is real and predates that lag effect.
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
634 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026, filtered to nitrocellulose, cellulose nitrate and nitrocellulose-grade terminology intersected with nitrogen-content, nitration-process, stabiliser and grade language under C06B25, C08B5 and C06B21.
A peak in 2017, then a steady decline
Filings ran at 21 in 2017, the high point of the tracked window, then fell toward single digits by the 2022 midpoint. That pattern is consistent with a technology where the core manufacturing routes and stabiliser chemistries were claimed early and few entrants have since found new ground worth patenting.
Explosives classification dominates, polysaccharide chemistry trails
C06B explosives and propellant claims account for 506 of 634 records. C08B polysaccharide derivatives (161), C06D gas-generating compositions (65) and F42B ammunition charges (46) make up most of the remainder, with polymer compositions, coatings and processing classes each contributing under 25 records — evidence of a technology whose commercial value has concentrated almost entirely in energetic applications.
Shares are the percentage of the 634 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Nitrocellulose Manufacturing and Grades with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about nitrocellulose manufacturing and grades and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records the field keeps citing
WO2013006218A1 — Methodology for determination of nitrogen content in nitrocellulose
The invention is directed to a method of determining the nitrogen content in nitrocellulose by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). It is within the scope of the invention for the sample of nitrocellulose to be unstable nitrocellulose, unrefined nitrocellulose, or refined nitrocellulose. The sample of nitrocellulose can be wet or dry. A sample of nitrocellulose that is wet can be in acid or in water. Before HPLC, the sample is dissolved in a suitable solvent. The nitrogen content of the sample is determined by comparing the retention time of the sample to a graph of retention time to amount of nitrogen due to the linear correlation of retention time and percent nitrogen substitution.Filed by Alliant Techsystems Inc., published 2013-01-10 — a measurement-method claim rather than a manufacturing-process claim, which narrows what it actually forecloses for process developers.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5516971A | Process for disposal of waste propellants and explosives | 81 |
| 2 | US5468313A | Plastisol explosive | 61 |
| 3 | US3670649A | Combustible cartridges | 56 |
| 4 | US6692655B1 | Method of making multi-base propellants from pelletized nitrocellulose | 41 |
| 5 | US3917767A | Process for the preparation of multiple-base propellant powder | 41 |
| 6 | US5218166A | Modified nitrocellulose based propellant composition | 40 |
| 7 | US4288262A | Gun propellants containing polyglycidyl azide polymer | 37 |
| 8 | US3894894A | Modified double base propellants with diisocyanate crosslinker | 37 |
| 9 | US5716557A | Method of making high energy explosives and propellants | 35 |
| 10 | US3956890A | Solid propellant binder and propellant | 33 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside this corpus; treat them as a measure of influence on downstream filers, not as a ranking of current commercial 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 patterns stand out once the raw counts are read against filing dates and IPC composition.
Activity has cooled, not accelerated
The trend runs from a 2017 high of 21 filings down through a 2022 midpoint of just 3. Even allowing for publication lag understating the last year or two, the multi-year decline through the middle of the window signals a field where core routes are already claimed rather than one attracting fresh investment.
Two claim traditions, little overlap
Energetic-materials framing (C06B) outweighs industrial polysaccharide framing (C08B) by roughly three to one. A filer targeting industrial-grade nitrocellulose for coatings or inks is working in a much thinner prior-art layer than one targeting propellant-grade material.
Filing has concentrated in two offices
The United States and United Kingdom together receive 371 of the tracked filings, well ahead of Europe, Russia, Japan and Canada. A freedom-to-operate check that stops at those two jurisdictions will miss meaningful Russian- and Japanese-office activity.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to nitrocellulose manufacturing and grades, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds ground, and where the gate is loose
Assignee momentum in this dataset reads as flat across the board: none of the historically active filers show new-year activity, which is consistent with the broader filing decline rather than any one company losing share to another.
No current-year momentum from established names
Hercules Incorporated, SNPE (Société Nationale des Poudres et Explosifs), Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), DuPont de Nemours, Inc. (USA), Dynamit Nobel AG and Olin Corporation all show zero filings in the most recent tracked year. That is a field-wide pattern, not a company-specific retreat, and matches the broader decline from the 2017 peak.
Collaboration is thin and historic
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear across the corpus, the strongest linking Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) with named individual inventors on a handful of filings each. This is an era of individually credited chemists working under a corporate assignee rather than modern multi-corporate joint filings.
Influence sits with older propellant and waste-disposal art
The most-cited records address propellant reprocessing, plastisol explosives and multi-base propellant manufacture from pelletized nitrocellulose — process patents, not grade-specification patents. Anyone designing a new stabiliser or grading method should still check these for process-step overlap even though they predate current filing activity.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Hercules Incorporated | 0 | — |
| SNPE (Société Nationale des Poudres et Explosifs) | 0 | — |
| Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) | 0 | — |
| DuPont de Nemours, Inc. (USA) | 0 | — |
| Dynamit Nobel AG | 0 | — |
| Olin Corporation | 0 | — |
| NITROCHEM WIMMIS | 0 | — |
| Chemring Defence Limited | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific follow-up questions rather than a single conclusion.
Check industrial-grade claim space directly
With C08B polysaccharide filings running at less than a third of C06B explosives volume, a targeted search on coating- and ink-grade nitrocellulose formulations is likely to surface thinner prior art than a propellant-grade search would.
Explore industrial-grade filings in EurekaVerify freedom to operate beyond the US and UK
Russian and Japanese receiving-office filings are smaller in volume but not negligible; a clearance search limited to the two largest offices will miss them.
Run a jurisdictional clearance check in EurekaRe-read the most-cited process patents against new grading methods
The highest-cited records concern propellant reprocessing and multi-base propellant manufacture, not measurement methods like WO2013006218A1. A new nitrogen-content or viscosity-grading method should be checked against both categories separately.
Compare process and measurement claims in EurekaCommon questions on nitrocellulose patents
The filing trend in this dataset runs from a peak of 21 in 2017 down to just 3 by the 2022 midpoint, with the most recent years understated because publication typically lags filing by around eighteen months. A decline of this size and duration usually indicates that the core manufacturing routes, stabiliser chemistries and grading methods have already been claimed by earlier filers, leaving less new ground for later entrants. It does not mean nitrocellulose has stopped being manufactured or used commercially — production and grade specification are mature, standardised processes that no longer generate the same volume of new IP.
In this corpus, propellant- and explosives-oriented claims are filed under IPC class C06B, which accounts for 506 of 634 tracked records, while industrial and coatings-oriented claims fall under C08B polysaccharide derivatives, C09D coatings or C08L polymer compositions, together well under 200 records. The two traditions rarely overlap within a single filing, meaning a stabiliser or nitration-control claim written for energetic-grade material will not automatically read on an industrial-grade coating formulation. Anyone filing in the industrial-grade space should search C08B, C09D and C08L specifically rather than relying on a C06B-focused prior-art search.
The assignees with the deepest historical filing records in this dataset include Hercules Incorporated, SNPE (Société Nationale des Poudres et Explosifs) (SNPE), Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) (Imperial Chemical Industries), DuPont de Nemours, Inc. (USA) (DuPont de Nemours), Dynamit Nobel AG and Olin Corporation. None of these six shows any filings in the most recent tracked year, which reflects the field-wide slowdown rather than a specific company exiting the space. Their citation-heavy older patents, particularly around propellant reprocessing and multi-base propellant manufacture, remain useful reference points for freedom-to-operate work even though current filing activity from these names is flat.
WO2013006218A1, filed by Alliant Techsystems Inc. and published in 2013, claims a method for determining nitrogen content in nitrocellulose using High Performance Liquid Chromatography, applicable to wet or dry, refined or unrefined samples. It is a measurement and quality-control method, not a manufacturing process or a material composition claim, so it does not by itself block someone from producing a new nitrocellulose grade or a new nitration process. It can still matter for anyone building an HPLC-based nitrogen-content test as part of a grading or quality-control pipeline, since that specific measurement approach is what the claims describe.
Relative to the 506 records concentrated in C06B explosives and propellant classifications, several adjacent branches carry comparatively thin filing volume: continuous nitration process control instrumentation, low-nitrogen industrial-grade stabiliser chemistry, cellulose-nitrate coating and ink formulation, and waste nitrocellulose reprocessing methods. These are not unclaimed areas, since some records exist in each, but the density is far lower than in core propellant chemistry, which generally means less prior art to design around. A first claim in one of these branches should focus tightly on a specific process parameter or formulation ratio rather than a broad compositional claim, since broad claims are more likely to run into the older, heavily cited propellant patents.
Research Nitrocellulose Manufacturing and Grades in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole nitrocellulose manufacturing and grades 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.