Proppant Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The top 5 assignees hold 49.3% of all 982 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 73.2% — this is a field with a short list of gatekeepers, not a fragmented one.
- Filing has cooled from its 2017 peak. Activity peaked at 67 records in 2017; the last complete comparison shows 2021's 19 records falling to 10 in 2024, a 47% drop over that span.
- Two IPC classes dominate the claim space. C09K (materials) and E21B (well drilling) cover 78.4% and 70.2% of the 982 records respectively — most everything else is a much thinner secondary layer.
Filing growth compares 2021 (19 records) with 2024 (10) — 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 982 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Proppant technology sits at the intersection of materials science and well engineering: ceramic proppants, resin-coated sand, and plain frac sand are all claimed against a common set of performance measures — crush resistance, long-term conductivity, embedment resistance, sphericity, pack permeability, and flowback control. This dataset pulls 982 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine a proppant-type term with at least one of those performance claims.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the last one to two years in any trend understate real activity — treat 2025 and 2026 figures as still filling in rather than as a genuine falloff.
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
Two views of the same 982 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing trend: a 2017 peak, then a step down
Filings peaked at 67 records in 2017. The most recent complete comparison — 2021's 19 records against 2024's 10 — shows a 47% decline over that three-year span; the low counts appearing after 2024 reflect publication lag, not a confirmed continuation of the trend.
Technology composition: materials and well-drilling classes dominate
C09K (materials for miscellaneous applications) appears on 78.4% of the 982 records and E21B (earth and rock drilling) on 70.2% — the two together form the backbone of nearly every filing. C04B (ceramics, cement and refractories) trails at 6.8%, with coating, polymer and catalysis classes each under 4%. Records can carry multiple classes, so these shares sum to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 982 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Proppant Types and Conductivity with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about proppant types and conductivity and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art and a representative filing
US20100256024A1 — Resin coated proppant slurry compositions and methods of making and using same
A resin coated proppant slurry and a method for preparing a slurry is provided where the resin coated proppant particles are rendered less dense by attaching stable micro-bubbles to the surface of the resin coated proppants. A collector or frother may be added to enhance the number or stability of bubbles attached to the proppants. This method and composition finds use in many industries, especially in oil field applications.Filed by Trican Well Service Ltd., published 2010-10-07.
View full filing| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5501275A | Control of particulate flowback in subterranean wells | 625 |
| 2 | US5330005A | Control of particulate flowback in subterranean wells | 560 |
| 3 | US5439055A | Control of particulate flowback in subterranean wells | 492 |
| 4 | US6632527B1 | Composite proppant, composite filtration media and methods for making and using same | 490 |
| 5 | US6582819B2 | Low density composite proppant, filtration media, gravel packing media, and sports field media, and methods f… | 438 |
| 6 | US6172011B1 | Control of particulate flowback in subterranean wells | 436 |
| 7 | US6528157B1 | Proppants with fiber reinforced resin coatings | 326 |
| 8 | US20020048676A1 | Low density composite proppant, filtration media, gravel packing media, and sports field media, and methods f… | 315 |
| 9 | US6357527B1 | Encapsulated breakers and method for use in treating subterranean formations | 312 |
| 10 | US6406789B1 | Composite proppant, composite filtration media and methods for making and using same | 265 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside a searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a measure of current commercial 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 data means for filing strategy
Three read-throughs from the concentration, trend and citation figures above.
A short list of gatekeepers, not a fragmented field
With the top 5 assignees alone accounting for 49.3% of all 982 records, most of the established proppant-type and conductivity claim space is already occupied by a handful of oilfield services and materials companies. New entrants filing against crush resistance or embedment claims should expect dense prior art from these players specifically, not a diffuse background.
Activity has stepped down from its 2017 peak
Filings peaked at 67 records in 2017 and the last complete year-over-year comparison, 2021 to 2024, shows a 47% decline. That does not necessarily mean interest has evaporated — mature claim territory naturally produces fewer new filings once the core mechanisms are covered — but it does mean fewer fresh applications are entering examination now than a decade ago.
Flowback control patents anchor the citation graph
The most-cited records in this dataset are all early flowback-control filings, each cited several hundred times by later applications. That concentration of citation weight signals these mechanisms became reference points for nearly everyone who filed afterward in this space, whatever proppant type they used.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to proppant types and conductivity, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space
The 982 records in scope resolve to 100 ranked assignees, with filing weight sitting heavily among a small group of oilfield services and proppant materials companies.
One filer well ahead of the field
The leading assignee's 150 records put it well clear of fifth place at 66 and tenth place at 37 — a gap that widens further down the ranking, where filing counts thin out quickly.
Corporate family filing shows up as co-assignee pairs
The strongest co-assignee pairs in this dataset link related corporate entities under a shared filing programme rather than independent joint ventures, which is typical where a single group files across multiple jurisdictional subsidiaries.
Even the leaders show no fresh filings in the latest year
Several of the highest-ranked assignees, including the overall leader, show zero new records in the most recent year tracked. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this reads as a data-visibility gap rather than confirmed withdrawal from the space.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Carbo Ceramics Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Halliburton Energy Services Inc | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Technology Corp | 0 | — |
| Clearwater International LLC | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Canada Ltd | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | 0 | — |
| Saudi Arabian Oil Co | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Ltd | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The figures above establish the shape of the field. The next steps depend on whether you are clearing a filing, tracking a competitor, or scoping new claim territory.
Check freedom to operate against the leaders
With 73.2% of records held by the top 10 assignees, any new resin-coating or embedment-control claim should be checked against their specific filings before drafting.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaTrack momentum shifts as 2025-2026 data fills in
The apparent drop after 2024 is partly a publication-lag artefact; revisit the trend once later years mature to see whether filing activity has genuinely slowed.
Set up a monitoring alert in EurekaScope the under-claimed branches
Surface functionalization, degradable coatings and real-time embedment sensing show thinner claim density than the core crush-resistance and flowback mechanisms.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions about proppant patents
This dataset's 982 records resolve to a ranked list of 100 assignees, led by a single company with 150 records, well ahead of fifth place at 66 and tenth place at 37. The top 5 assignees combined hold 49.3% of all records, and the top 10 hold 73.2%, so the field is concentrated among a small group of oilfield services and materials companies rather than spread evenly. Anyone entering this space should expect to review those leaders' filings specifically, since generic prior-art searches will surface their patents repeatedly.
Filings peaked at 67 records in 2017 and have generally trended down since. The clearest recent comparison, 2021's 19 records against 2024's 10, shows a 47% decline over that three-year span. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the very latest years in any dataset understate real activity, so 2025-2026 figures should not be read as confirmation that filing has stopped.
In this dataset, all three proppant types are claimed against the same core performance criteria: crush resistance, long-term conductivity, embedment resistance, sphericity, pack permeability and flowback control. Ceramic proppant claims tend to cluster with C04B (ceramics and refractories) classifications, while resin-coated and additive-based approaches show more overlap with C08K and C08G polymer classes. Frac sand claims are typically differentiated by surface treatment or coating method rather than the base material itself, since untreated sand is not novel on its own.
The most-cited records in this landscape are early flowback-control patents, with the leading one cited 625 times, closely followed by others in the 400-600 range. High citation counts in a searched corpus tend to favour older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations, so treat these as markers of foundational influence rather than as evidence that the underlying technology is still the most commercially relevant approach today.
The technology composition shows heavy concentration in C09K and E21B classes, covering 78.4% and 70.2% of records respectively, while classes like B05D (coating processes) and C08G (condensation polymers) each sit under 2%. That gap suggests thinner claim density around surface functionalization coatings, degradable resin chemistries, and real-time embedment sensing — areas adjacent to the core mechanisms but not yet as densely claimed as crush resistance or flowback control itself.
Research Proppant Types and Conductivity in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole proppant types and conductivity 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.