Piezoelectric Polymers (PVDF) Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing peaked in 2021 at 13 records and has since flattened, with the midpoint year 2022 back down to 1 — a field that grew fast then stalled rather than one still accelerating.
- The top 5 assignees hold 43.5% of all 85 records in scope while the top 10 hold 69.4%, leaving a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants among the 35 ranked companies.
- H10N covers 96.5% of records and H01L 69.4% but narrower classes like H01G (capacitors, 8.2%) and C08K (additives, 9.4%) show far thinner coverage — a proxy for where claim space is less occupied.
What the PVDF piezoelectric polymer patent record covers
This landscape draws on 85 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine piezoelectric polymer claim language — beta phase content, poling process, d33 coefficient, flexible sensor application, thermal stability — with IPC codes for solid-state devices (H10N30), polymer fluorine chemistry (C08F14) and polymer shaping or treatment (C08J5). The scope is narrow by design: it isolates documents where the polymer’s piezoelectric behaviour, not just its composition, is the subject of the claims.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent year in any trend line understates real filing activity; 2026 in particular should be read as partial, not as a drop-off.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 85 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
A 2021 peak followed by a flat-to-declining trend
Filings rose from 4 in 2017 to a peak of 13 in 2021, then fell back sharply — the midpoint year 2022 shows just 1 filing in this dataset. That pattern is more consistent with a technology that had an early wave of core claims staked out than one still building momentum, though the last one to two years are undercounted due to publication lag.
H10N and H01L dominate; downstream classes are thinner
H10N (other electric solid-state devices) appears in 96.5% of the 85 records and H01L (semiconductor devices) in 69.4%, confirming that most filings frame the polymer as part of a device structure. Polymer-specific classes are comparatively modest: C08J (polymer processing) at 20.0%, C08L (polymer compositions) at 16.5%, and C08K (additives) at just 9.4% — narrower slices worth checking before assuming they are crowded.
Shares are the percentage of the 85 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Piezoelectric Polymers (PVDF) with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about piezoelectric polymers (pvdf) and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe documents anchoring this field
Piezoelectric polymer film element with hollow-particle fillers (Bayer)
The present invention relates to a piezoelectric polymer film element, in particular a polymer foil, comprising a polymer matrix, wherein hollow particles are arranged in the polymer matrix, and a process for the production of such a piezoelectric polymer film element, comprising the steps: A) provision of hollow particles and B) introduction of the hollow particles into a polymer matrix and C) shaping of the polymer matrix as a polymer film. The invention furthermore relates to an electromechanical converter comprising at least one first polymer film which comprises hollow particles as fillers.Filed by Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH, published 2013-01-31 as US20130026411A1.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US4868447A | Piezoelectric polymer laminates for torsional and bending modal control | 154 |
| 2 | US3940637A | Polymeric piezoelectric key actuated device | 154 |
| 3 | US4568851A | Piezoelectric coaxial cable having a helical inner conductor | 117 |
| 4 | US20190284423A1 | Piezoelectric composite, ink and ink cartridge for 3D printing, bifunctional material comprising the piezoele… | 70 |
| 5 | WO2018085936A1 | Piezoelectric composite, ink and ink cartridge for 3D printing, bifunctional material comprising the piezoele… | 65 |
| 6 | US5369995A | Humidity sensor | 62 |
| 7 | US4688306A | Method of preparing a piezoelectric device | 52 |
| 8 | WO2015077200A1 | Multi-layer piezoelectric polymer film devices and methods | 46 |
| 9 | US20170331027A1 | Piezoelectric fiber having excellent flexibility and elasticity, and method for manufacturing the same | 44 |
| 10 | US20160291729A1 | Multi-layer piezoelectric polymer film devices and methods | 41 |
Citation counts favour older filings inside any searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later work, not as a measure of current relevance.
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 ranking, the trend and the IPC composition are read together.
The lead is real but not overwhelming
The leading assignee holds 11 records and fifth place holds 6 — a meaningful gap, but not a monopoly. With the top 10 combined at 69.4% of all 85 records, roughly three in ten records belong to the long tail of the 35 ranked companies, which is where freedom-to-operate work tends to be underexplored.
Activity has cooled since the 2021 peak
Filings rose steadily to 13 in 2021 then dropped to 1 by the 2022 midpoint shown in this dataset. None of the six assignees with the strongest recent-year momentum data show any filings in the latest year, consistent with a first wave of claims having already been staked rather than an ongoing race.
Additive and capacitor-adjacent claims are thin
While H10N and H01L cover the large majority of records, additive formulation (C08K, 9.4%) and capacitor structures (H01G, 8.2%) appear far less often. That gap does not mean the technology is unworkable there — it means fewer prior filings define the boundaries of what can be claimed.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to piezoelectric polymers (pvdf), with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is still open
The ranked assignees span materials companies, chemical firms and research foundations; several early filers show no activity in the most recent year, which is worth separating from firms still filing steadily.
A single leader, no runaway margin
The top-ranked assignee holds 11 of the 85 records in scope, ahead of a fifth-place holder at 6 and a tenth-place holder at 3 — a gradual taper rather than a cliff.
Most filers appear only a handful of times
Beyond the top 10, which together hold 69.4% of records, the remaining 25 ranked assignees split the rest — a pattern typical of a field with an academic and industrial mix rather than a few dominant portfolios.
Co-filing is limited and university-centred
Only six co-assignee pairs appear in this dataset, the strongest linking a university research foundation with individual named inventors rather than joint corporate filings — collaboration here looks more like sponsored research than cross-licensing.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| SABIC Global Technologies BV | 0 | — |
| PENNWALT CORP | 0 | — |
| Ray-O-Vac Chemical Co. | 0 | — |
| Cogent Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Florida State University Research Foundation Inc. | 0 | — |
| 3M Innovative Properties Co. | 0 | — |
| Cornell Research Foundation Inc. | 0 | — |
| Polyvalor LP | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific follow-up questions rather than a single conclusion.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top 10
With 69.4% of records held by ten assignees, a claim chart against those portfolios specifically — rather than the full 35-company ranking — will surface most of the real blocking risk.
Run a claim comparisonProbe the under-claimed IPC branches
C08K and H01G sit well below H10N and H01L in record share; a narrower search inside those classes can confirm whether the gap reflects open space or simply a different search vocabulary.
Explore adjacent classesRevisit momentum after the lag window closes
Because publication lags filing by about 18 months, the apparent post-2021 decline should be re-checked once 2025 and 2026 filings finish publishing.
Track filing trendsCommon questions about PVDF piezoelectric polymer patents
Across the 85 records in this dataset, the leading assignee holds 11 records, with the fifth-ranked company at 6 and the tenth at 3. The ranking includes 35 companies in total, spanning specialty chemicals firms, materials suppliers and university research foundations, so leadership here is a matter of degree rather than a single dominant player. The top 5 assignees combined account for 43.5% of all records, and the top 10 for 69.4%, leaving a substantial share spread across the remaining ranked entrants.
Not currently, based on the years captured in this dataset. Filings climbed from 4 in 2017 to a peak of 13 in 2021, then dropped sharply, with the 2022 midpoint showing only 1 filing. Because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, the last one to two years in the trend are undercounted and should not be read as a hard stop, but the multi-year pattern since the 2021 peak points to cooling rather than continued acceleration.
This Bayer Intellectual Property filing claims a piezoelectric polymer film element — specifically a polymer foil incorporating hollow particles distributed through a polymer matrix — along with the process for making it and an electromechanical converter built from such a film. The hollow-particle filler is the distinguishing feature: it is what differentiates this claim from a plain PVDF or P(VDF-TrFE) film. Anyone designing a competing film-based piezoelectric converter should check whether their filler or void structure falls inside or outside this claim's specific hollow-particle approach.
H10N (other electric solid-state devices) is the dominant class, appearing in 96.5% of the 85 records in scope, followed by H01L (semiconductor devices) at 69.4%. Polymer-specific classes are used less often: C08J (polymer processing) at 20.0%, C08L (compositions) at 16.5%, and C08K (additives) at 9.4%. A record can carry several of these classes at once, so a thorough search should not stop at H10N alone — the polymer-chemistry classes catch filings framed around material composition rather than device structure.
Based on IPC record share, the narrower classes of C08K (additive-modified formulations, 9.4% of records) and H01G (capacitor structures, 8.2%) show meaningfully thinner coverage than the H10N and H01L core. This does not guarantee an easy filing — it means fewer existing documents define the claim boundaries there, so a well-drafted application has more room to stake new ground. Audio transducer applications under H04R, at 16.5%, sit in between and are worth a closer look for anyone targeting flexible sensor or diaphragm designs.
Research Piezoelectric Polymers (PVDF) in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole piezoelectric polymers (pvdf) 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.