Pump Cavitation Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees account for 62.5% of all 112 records in scope, and the ranked leader alone holds 33.
- Filing has cooled since 2020. Activity peaked at 5 filings in 2020, and the 2021-to-2024 span (the last complete years) shows a -100% change.
- Claims cluster in general pump hardware. F04D non-positive-displacement pumps covers 36.6% of records, far ahead of any downstream application class.
Filing growth compares 2021 (5 records) with 2024 (0) — 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 112 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks published patent records at the intersection of pump cavitation and suction performance — filings that combine language on net positive suction head or suction specific speed with mechanisms such as inducer design, vapor pressure margin, bubble collapse, erosion pitting, cavitation inception or noise signature. The scope runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, spanning 112 published records across 34 ranked assignees.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent one to two years in any trend chart will look thinner than they eventually turn out to be. Treat the last complete year, not the latest one, as the read on current activity.
Filing trend and technology mix
Two views of the same 112 records: how filing activity moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim language.
Filing trend: a 2020 peak, then a pullback
Filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 5 in 2020, then declined; the 2021-to-2024 span, the last stretch of years complete enough to compare, shows a -100% change. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still filling in as later-filed applications publish.
IPC composition: general pump hardware dominates
F04D (non-positive-displacement pumps) appears in 36.6% of the 112 records, well ahead of B01F mixing and stirring at 17.9% and B01D separation processes at 12.5%. Because a record can carry more than one IPC class, these shares add up to more than 100% of the record total — they are not mutually exclusive buckets.
Shares are the percentage of the 112 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Pump Cavitation and Suction Performance with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about pump cavitation and suction performance and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in the corpus
Controlled Bubble Collapse Milling
A system for processing ores is provided. The system includes a bubble collapse mill and a control system that interacts with an external system to evaluate and manipulate the processing of an ore.Filed by B9 Plasma, Inc. — one of a small cluster of records that apply controlled bubble-collapse mechanics to ore processing rather than to pump hardware itself.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20100300683A1 | Real Time Pump Monitoring | 292 |
| 2 | US20140322050A1 | Pump System | 172 |
| 3 | US20120186560A1 | Homogenizing fuel enhancement system | 67 |
| 4 | US6699008B2 | Flow stabilizing device | 50 |
| 5 | US20020192073A1 | Flow stabilizing device | 47 |
| 6 | US6666906B2 | Gas dehydration using membrane and potassium formate solution | 36 |
| 7 | US3299821A | Pump inducer | 36 |
| 8 | US7455497B2 | High performance inducer | 31 |
| 9 | US20170091358A1 | Model-based prognosis of machine health | 29 |
| 10 | US20120071702A1 | Chemical Reactor System and Method Using Regenerative Turbine Pump to Produce Fuel Gas | 12 |
Citation counts inside this corpus favour older filings that have had more years to accumulate citations; read them as a signal of influence on the field, not of current commercial weight.
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 read-outs from the ranking, the trend and the citation table, translated into what they imply for anyone deciding where to file next.
The field is not wide open at the top
With the leading assignee alone credited with 33 records and the top five combined holding 70 of the 112 records in scope, new entrants are filing against an occupied core rather than empty ground. That does not mean the space is closed — it means claim drafting has to work around established hardware-level patents rather than repeat them.
Filing activity has pulled back from its 2020 peak
Activity peaked at 5 filings in 2020 and fell across the following complete years, reaching zero by 2024. Given the 18-month publication lag, this reads as a cooling filing cycle rather than a dead one, but it is not evidence of renewed acceleration.
Influence concentrates in a handful of older filings
The most-cited records in the table are pump-monitoring and flow-stabilizing filings rather than cavitation-specific mechanism patents, which suggests the field's most-referenced prior art sits one layer above the cavitation-mechanism claims themselves.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to pump cavitation and suction performance, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranking is dominated by one leading assignee, a mid-tier of firms with a handful of records each, and a long tail of single or double-filers — a pattern typical of a field with an occupied core and unclaimed edges.
One assignee sets the floor for the whole field
The leading assignee's 33 records against a 112-record total means any freedom-to-operate review in this space has to start with their portfolio, not end with it.
Most ranked filers hold only a handful of records
Beyond the top ten — which together hold 82.1% of all 112 records — the remaining assignees in the 34-company ranking each contribute a small number of filings, typical of applied mechanism patents filed opportunistically rather than as part of a sustained program.
Collaboration is rare and narrow
Only three co-assignee pairs appear across the corpus, the strongest linking a single pair of filers on five shared records. Most work in this field is filed by a sole assignee rather than jointly.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| B9 PLASMA | 0 | — |
| Exen Holdings LLC | 0 | — |
| Concepts ETI, Inc. | 0 | — |
| BUTLER JAMES CHARLES | 0 | — |
| Argo Technologies | 0 | — |
| Clearwater International LLC | 0 | — |
| DAJUSTCO IP HLDG | 0 | — |
| CONSTRUC IND LLC | 0 | — |
Where to take this from here
The landscape points to an occupied hardware core and several thinner adjacent branches. Two directions follow from that.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top five
Before drafting new inducer or suction-geometry claims, screen against the top five assignees' portfolios directly — they hold 62.5% of all 112 records, and hardware-level claims in F04D are the most likely point of overlap.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches for real white space
Noise-signature detection and vapor-pressure-margin control loops show up far less often than core inducer and pump-body claims. Running a deeper prior-art search on these specific mechanisms is the fastest way to confirm whether they are genuinely open or just under-indexed.
Run a deeper search in EurekaCommon questions on pump cavitation patents
Within this 112-record dataset, one assignee leads with 33 records, well ahead of the rest of the field. The top five assignees combined account for 62.5% of all 112 records in scope, and the top ten account for 82.1%, so the field is concentrated rather than evenly spread. Anyone assessing this space should treat the leading assignee's portfolio as the primary reference point for freedom-to-operate work, not just one filer among many.
Filing activity peaked at 5 records in 2020 and declined through the following years, with the 2021-to-2024 span — the most recent stretch that can be treated as complete — showing a -100% change. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in the dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming a continued decline. The honest read is that the field cooled from its 2020 high point, not that it has stopped.
F04D, the IPC subclass covering non-positive-displacement pumps, appears in 36.6% of the 112 records in scope, making it the single largest technology cluster. B01F mixing and stirring (17.9%) and B01D separation processes (12.5%) follow at meaningfully lower shares. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these percentages add up to more than 100% and should be read as overlapping clusters rather than exclusive categories.
The clearest gaps sit adjacent to the dense F04D and B01F clusters: inducer geometry aimed specifically at extending suction-specific speed, acoustic noise-signature detection of cavitation inception, and vapor-pressure-margin control loops all appear far less often than general pump-hardware claims. These are not confirmed as legally open — they are simply under-indexed in this corpus — so a targeted prior-art search on the specific mechanism is the necessary next step before drafting.
With the top five of 34 ranked assignees holding 62.5% of all 112 records, and the top ten holding 82.1%, this is a concentrated field by the standards of a niche mechanical subdomain. That said, 112 records and 34 ranked assignees is a modest dataset compared to broad pump categories generally, so the concentration reflects a smaller, more specialised claim space rather than a saturated mass market.
Research Pump Cavitation and Suction Performance in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole pump cavitation and suction performance 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.