Acoustic Emission Localization Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
A data-led view of 135 patent families in acoustic emission source localization for nondestructive testing: filing trends, IPC composition, assignee concentration and white space, current to the 2026 data cut-off.
Filing growth = 2021 (9 records) → 2024 (3); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 135 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Acoustic emission source localization identifies where a crack, leak or other structural event originated by comparing arrival times of the emitted waveform across an array of sensors. This landscape covers 135 published patent families filed between 2015 and the 2026-08-31 cut-off, spanning nondestructive testing applications from pressure vessels and pipelines to civil and aerospace structures.
Filing activity peaked in 2021 and the claim space concentrates heavily in material-testing classifications, with a long tail of smaller filers working in adjacent vibration, positioning and AI-classification branches.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
The dataset covers 135 published records from 2015 through the 2026-08-31 cut-off, spanning receiving offices from the United States to the WIPO PCT route.
Filing activity, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 3 in 2017 to a peak of 9 in 2021, then eased to 3 by 2024 — a -67% change over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in given the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication, so the most recent years should not yet be read as a decline.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
G01N (material analysis and testing) carries 73.3% of the 135 records, far ahead of G01H (vibration and sound measurement, 12.6%), F27D and G01M (each 9.6%), and G01S (8.1%). AI-linked G06N and medical A61B each sit at 5.2%, with drilling-related E21B at 3.7% — since records can carry multiple classes, these shares add up to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 135 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Nondestructive Testing: Acoustic Emission Source Localization Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about nondestructive testing: acoustic emission source localization patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
WO2020164257A1 — Microseismic/acoustic emission source localization for complex structures with voids
The filing describes a node-based localization method for structures containing voids: sensors at fixed positions record actual arrival-time differences of P-wave signals from an unknown source, a grid of candidate nodes is scored against theoretical travel-time differences, and the node with the smallest deviation is taken as the source's location coordinates. The method is presented as more accurate than conventional triangulation for complex, void-bearing structures such as mines or tunnels.Filed by Central South University, published 2020-08-20.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6213958B1 | Method and apparatus for the acoustic emission monitoring detection, localization, and classification of meta… | 200 |
| 2 | US6076405A | Remote self-powered structure monitor | 113 |
| 3 | US6014896A | Remote self-powered structure monitor | 87 |
| 4 | US6192759B1 | Remote self-powered structure monitor | 77 |
| 5 | US5161408A | Photo-acoustic leak detection system and method | 76 |
| 6 | US5528557A | Acoustic emission source location by reverse ray tracing | 69 |
| 7 | US4592034A | Acoustic emission source location on plate-like structures using a small array of transducers | 62 |
| 8 | US20090070048A1 | Acoustic structural integrity monitoring system and method | 58 |
| 9 | US4685335A | Method and apparatus for monitoring cracks of a rotatable body | 58 |
| 10 | US6024711A | Diagnosis of osteoporosis using acoustic emissions | 50 |
Citation counts inside this corpus favour older records and should be read as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a measure 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 filing data signals
Four figures from the dataset matter more than the rest for anyone deciding where to file or who to watch next.
No single filer dominates
The leading assignee holds 16 records; the top 5 combined reach 36.3% of all 135 records in scope. That is enough to matter but not enough to block new entrants outright.
Peak passed, recent years incomplete
Filings peaked at 9 in 2021 and dropped to 3 by 2024. Publication lag means 2025-2026 numbers will keep rising as later filings publish, so this should not yet be read as a permanent decline.
Material-testing claims dominate
G01N (material analysis and testing) covers nearly three-quarters of records, making it the densest area to search before drafting new claims.
AI classification is still a thin claim area
Only 5.2% of records combine acoustic emission localization with AI-based computing methods, alongside a similarly thin 5.2% for medical diagnostic use — both notably less occupied than the G01N core.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to nondestructive testing: acoustic emission source localization patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where to go from here
The figures above set the scope; the next step is testing a specific claim or filing strategy against the full dataset.
Check freedom-to-operate before drafting
Run a candidate claim against the foundational arrival-time and node-search patents identified here to see what is actually blocked.
Open EurekaTrack the assignees still filing
Follow the ranked leaders and the long tail of single-filing entrants as new publications land in this space.
Open EurekaFrequently asked questions
It pinpoints where a crack, leak or other structural event originated by comparing the arrival times of the acoustic emission waveform at multiple sensors. The technique is used across pressure vessels, pipelines, aerospace structures and civil infrastructure to flag damage before it becomes visible or catastrophic. Most patented methods rely on arrival-time-difference triangulation, sometimes combined with machine-learning classification of the waveform to distinguish genuine defects from noise.
The ranked leaders list 54 companies and institutions, with the top filer holding 16 of the 135 records in scope and the top 5 together accounting for 36.3% of all records. That is a moderate concentration, not a lockout: the top 10 combined reach 57.0% of records, leaving a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants including universities and specialist instrumentation firms. No single assignee currently holds a blocking position across the whole field.
Filings rose from 3 in 2017 to a peak of 9 in 2021, then fell to 3 by 2024, a -67% change over that span. However, publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as evidence of a slowdown. The honest read is that the field peaked around 2021 and the post-2024 trend will only be clear once later years finish publishing.
The bulk of activity sits in G01N (material analysis and testing), which covers 73.3% of the 135 records in scope. Secondary classes include G01H (vibration and sound measurement, 12.6%), F27D and G01M (each 9.6%), and G01S (radar, sonar and positioning, 8.1%). Smaller but distinct clusters appear in G06N (AI-based computing, 5.2%), A61B (medical diagnosis, 5.2%) and E21B (drilling, 3.7%), which mark where the technology has been adapted to specific end-use domains.
The thinnest branches by record share are AI-based classification (G06N, 5.2%), medical diagnostic use (A61B, 5.2%) and drilling/well applications (E21B, 3.7%), all well below the dominant G01N core at 73.3%. These adjacent branches are where a narrowly drafted claim combining a specific sensor geometry or classification method with the localization step is least likely to run into dense prior art. Because the top 5 assignees hold only 36.3% of all 135 records, the field overall still has room for new entrants rather than being closed off by a small group of incumbents.
Research Nondestructive Testing: Acoustic Emission Source Localization Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole nondestructive testing: acoustic emission source localization 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.