Onboard Charger Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Small, concentrated corpus. Only 21 published families sit inside this search string, with filings peaking in 2019 and flattening since — this is a narrow, still-open claim space, not a crowded one.
- U.S.-centric filing. 18 of 21 records were filed at the USPTO, against one each at the EPO, India and WIPO — protection outside the U.S. is thin.
- One family line dominates citations. The four most-cited records all trace to the same 'charging multiple energy storage devices' family, with counts from 89 down to 13 — a strong signal of influence, not necessarily of current relevance.
What this landscape covers
Onboard charger (OBC) simulation and modeling patents describe the circuit-level, thermal and control-loop simulation methods used to design and validate the charger hardware built into an electric vehicle. This search string pulls records that combine OBC or on-board charger terminology with circuit simulation, thermal modeling, or control loop simulation language in the title, abstract or claims — a deliberately narrow intersection rather than the broader OBC hardware category.
The corpus is small: 21 published families across roughly a decade of filing activity, concentrated almost entirely in vehicle propulsion and power-supply classifications. That size matters for how the data should be read — rankings and trend lines here describe a niche still being staked out, not a mature, saturated field.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 21-family dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in. Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent years understate real filing activity.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings opened at 4 in 2017, peaked at 5 in 2019, and had fallen to 2 by the 2022 midpoint — a flat-to-declining trajectory rather than sustained growth. The 2026 figure of 0 reflects the partial year and publication lag, not a stop in filing.
IPC subclass distribution
B60L (electric vehicle propulsion) covers 19 of 21 records and H02J (power supply and grid systems) covers 15, confirming that most filings frame the charger as a vehicle-power-electronics problem. G01R (electric and magnetic measurement) appears in only 4 records and B64D (aircraft equipment) in 1, marking both as thin, adjacent branches rather than core territory.
Shares are the percentage of the 21 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Onboard Charger Simulation and Modeling with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about onboard charger simulation and modeling and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a recent filing
On-board charger and inverter system for vehicles
Describes a unified charger-cum-traction-inverter (UCCTI) enabling bidirectional AC/DC conversion, coupled to a rechargeable battery and a dual three-phase permanent magnet synchronous motor whose terminal sets connect selectively to an external AC source — collapsing separate charging and traction inverter hardware into one shared power path.Filed by Matter Motor Works Private Limited, published 2026-01-29 — one of the most recent filings in this dataset.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20130307489A1 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 89 |
| 2 | US8981727B2 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 55 |
| 3 | US20210070185A1 | Smart Power Hub | 39 |
| 4 | US20150183328A1 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 36 |
| 5 | US9821668B2 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 13 |
| 6 | US20220153149A1 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 9 |
| 7 | US20180354373A1 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 4 |
| 8 | US10081258B2 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 4 |
| 9 | US20180022222A1 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 4 |
| 10 | US20180022221A1 | Method and apparatus for charging multiple energy storage devices | 4 |
Citation counts accumulate over time and favour older filings; treat this table as a map of influence within the searched corpus, not a ranking of current technical 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 say
Three read-outs from the dataset worth acting on before drafting claims or scoping freedom-to-operate work in this space.
Momentum has cooled, not disappeared
Filing activity peaked in 2019 and the 2022 midpoint sits at just 2 filings. Combined with the 18-month publication lag, this looks like a field that had an early burst of interest and has since settled into occasional filing rather than a growth curve.
Protection is concentrated in the U.S.
With only one filing each at the EPO, India's patent office and via WIPO/PCT, applicants in this niche have largely not pursued multi-jurisdiction coverage. That leaves meaningful room to file first outside the U.S. on the same technical ground.
Influence sits with one family lineage
The five most-cited records trace back to variants of the same 'charging multiple energy storage devices' invention. That concentration suggests foundational claim territory was staked early, with later filings building around rather than directly on top of it.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to onboard charger simulation and modeling, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is open
With only 21 families and no assignee showing growth in the latest year, this is not a field with an entrenched leader — it is a scattered set of single- or double-digit filers, several of them now inactive.
No assignee is currently active
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum, including automotive OEM co-filers, shows zero filings in the latest year, with some down 100% year-over-year. That flatness across the board — not just at the top — suggests the pace of new filing has genuinely slowed rather than shifted to a new entrant.
Collaboration is occasional, not structural
Ten co-assignee pairs appear across 21 families, the strongest repeating twice. That is enough to show joint OEM-supplier or OEM-OEM filing happens here, but not enough to indicate a stable alliance pattern the way denser fields often show.
Room to file outside the U.S. first
Because 18 of 21 records sit at the USPTO, a filer targeting Europe, India or a broader PCT strategy on the same simulation techniques faces far less prior art to design around in those offices specifically.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| General Electric Company | 0 | — |
| Hong Kong Applied Science and Technology Research Institute (ASTRI) | 0 | — |
| Kia Motors Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| Hyundai Motor Company | 0 | -100% |
| KUSCH RUEDIGER SOEREN | 0 | — |
| KING ROBERT DEAN | 0 | — |
| VEL TECH MULTI TECH DR RANGARAJAN DR SAKUNTHALA ENG COLLEGE | 0 | -100% |
| S SUBRAMANI | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
This landscape identifies the filing pattern and the gaps; deciding whether to file, license or design around requires digging into specific claim language.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on the top-cited family
The 'charging multiple energy storage devices' lineage carries the heaviest citation weight in this corpus. Before drafting claims that touch multi-device charging control, check its claim scope directly.
Open Eureka to search this familyMap the under-claimed sub-areas against your roadmap
Thermal derating and BMS co-simulation both sit at the edge of this corpus, with only a handful of records touching them directly. That gap is worth checking against any product roadmap already assuming these techniques are open.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
This dataset identifies 21 published patent families matching the combination of onboard charger terminology with circuit simulation, thermal modeling or control loop simulation language, covering 2015 through mid-2026. That is a small, narrow corpus compared to the broader onboard charger hardware category, because the search deliberately restricts to simulation and modeling claims rather than charger circuits generally. Filing peaked in 2019 at 5 records and has been flat or declining since, though the most recent year is understated due to publication lag.
No single assignee dominates this corpus; recent-year momentum data shows every tracked assignee, including automotive OEM co-filers, at zero filings in the latest year. Co-assignee pairs appear ten times across the 21 families, with the strongest pairs repeating only twice, which points to occasional joint filing rather than a stable leader-and-followers structure. Anyone entering this space should expect a scattered field of small filers rather than one incumbent to design around.
Eighteen of the 21 records in this corpus were filed at the USPTO, with only one each at the European Patent Office, India's patent office and via the WIPO/PCT route. This suggests applicants working on onboard charger simulation have prioritised U.S. protection and have not pursued broad multi-jurisdiction filing strategies for these specific claims. That leaves a practical opening: filing first in Europe, India or through PCT on comparable simulation techniques faces considerably less directly on-point prior art in those specific offices.
The five most-cited records in this corpus all trace to variants of a single 'charging multiple energy storage devices' invention, with citation counts ranging from 89 down to 13. High citation counts inside a searched corpus tend to favour older filings simply because they have had more time to be cited, so this pattern is best read as a marker of foundational influence rather than a statement that these are the most commercially relevant patents today. Newer filings, including the 2026 Matter Motor Works record, have not yet had time to accumulate comparable citation counts.
The IPC composition shows heavy concentration in B60L (electric vehicle propulsion, 19 of 21 records) and H02J (power supply and grid systems, 15 records), while G01R (electric and magnetic measurement) appears in only 4 and B64D (aircraft equipment) in just 1. That imbalance points to measurement-based fault detection and aircraft-adapted charger circuits as thin branches relative to the core vehicle-propulsion filing base. Control-loop co-simulation with battery management systems and thermal derating modeling for power modules also show limited direct representation and are worth checking against any planned claim drafting.
Research Onboard Charger Simulation and Modeling in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole onboard charger simulation and modeling 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.