Robot Gripper Force Sensor Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
A data-backed look at robot gripper force sensor patents: who leads filings, how the technology splits across IPC classes, and where claim space stays open.
Filing growth = 2021 (20 records) → 2024 (20); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 285 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What the robot gripper force sensor patent record shows
Robot gripper force sensors sit at the intersection of two IPC families: B25J for the manipulator and gripper mechanics, and G01L for the force and pressure measurement itself. The 285 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026 cut-off and show a field with one clear leader, a fast-thinning group behind it, and a filing curve that already passed its peak year in 2019. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the last one to two years in any trend chart will read lower than actual filing activity once the backlog clears.
The composition data is the more actionable read for freedom-to-operate work: nearly all records touch the gripper mechanism itself, but only a minority stake out force-sensing claims specifically. That gap is where a new entrant's claims are less likely to collide with an incumbent's mechanical patents.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 285-record dataset: how filing activity moved year over year, and how those records distribute across the IPC subclasses that define this technology.
Filing activity, 2017–2026
Filings rose from 5 in 2017 to a peak of 35 in 2019, then settled into a plateau — 2021 and 2024 both sit at 20 filings, a 0% change over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because of publication lag and should not 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
B25J (manipulators and robots) appears in 94.4% of the 285 records, confirming this is fundamentally a gripper-mechanism dataset. G01L (force and pressure measurement) appears in 15.8%, with smaller overlaps into sheet-metal working (B21D, 6.0%), surgical and diagnostic applications (A61B, 4.2%), material handling (B65G, 3.5%), and machine-tool fittings, control systems, and connectors (each 2.8%). Because records can carry multiple classes, these shares sum to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 285 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Robot Gripper Force Sensor Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about robot gripper force sensor patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
US11345043B2 — Axial force sensor, robot gripper, and robot having the same (Flexiv Ltd., 2022-05-31)
An axial force sensor, a robot gripper and a robot are provided. The axial force sensor includes a sensing diaphragm and at least two signal pairs. The sensing diaphragm includes an inner ring, an outer ring and a connecting element connected between the inner ring and the outer ring. The connecting element is more compliant in a direction of the axial force to be detected than in other loading directions. Each signal pair includes a signal emitter and a signal receiver. The signal emitter is coupled to one of the inner ring and the outer ring. The signal receiver is coupled to the other of the inner ring and the outer ring.Abstract as filed; claim scope should be read against the full claim set, not this summary.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US4600357A | Gripper force sensor/controller for robotic arm | 273 |
| 2 | US20160016311A1 | Real-Time Determination of Object Metrics for Trajectory Planning | 252 |
| 3 | US9205558B1 | Multiple suction cup control | 163 |
| 4 | US20010045755A1 | Gripper system, in particular vacuum gripper system | 154 |
| 5 | US20130151007A1 | Method for the selection of physical objects in a robot system | 130 |
| 6 | US20140277742A1 | Intuitive grasp control of a multi-axis robotic gripper | 122 |
| 7 | US6502877B2 | Gripper system, in particular vacuum gripper system | 119 |
| 8 | US20110087360A1 | Robot parts assembly on a workpiece moving on an assembly line | 108 |
| 9 | US5761940A | Methods and apparatuses for backgaging and sensor-based control of bending operations | 86 |
| 10 | US20190381670A1 | Systems, Devices, Components, and Methods for a Compact Robotic Gripper with Palm-Mounted Sensing, Grasping, … | 77 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and favour older filings; a low citation count on a recent filing is not a signal of weakness.
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 concentration and citation data mean for filing strategy
Three figures from the dataset matter more than the raw record count: how tightly filings concentrate at the top, where the oldest and most-cited prior art sits, and how co-filing pairs reveal corporate structure rather than technical collaboration.
The top tier is thin, not dominant
The leading assignee holds 22 records and the top 5 combined hold 67 — 23.5% of all 285 records in scope. The top 10 combined reach 35.4%. That leaves nearly two-thirds of the field distributed across 90 more ranked assignees, many with only a handful of filings each.
The most-cited prior art predates the current filing wave
US4600357A, a gripper force sensor and controller for a robotic arm, carries 273 citations — the highest in this dataset. High citation counts here reflect age and foundational status within the searched corpus more than current commercial relevance.
Co-assignee pairs mostly trace corporate affiliates
Only 9 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest pairings link a parent company to its regional subsidiary rather than two independent filers collaborating. This is a field of largely solo filers, not joint development.
Filing activity has plateaued since the 2019 peak
Filings peaked at 35 in 2019 and have since settled near 20 a year, with 2021 and 2024 both at 20 — flat growth over that span. This reads as a maturing filing wave, not stalled interest; the underlying claim space it occupies is settled rather than shrinking.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to robot gripper force sensor patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, competitive tracking, or identifying open claim territory.
Map the G01L force-sensing claims specifically
With only 15.8% of records carrying a G01L class against 94.4% for B25J, a focused pull of just the force-measurement claims — separated from gripper mechanics — will show more precisely who owns the sensing element itself.
Explore force-sensor claims in EurekaTrack the long tail for acquisition or licensing signals
With 90 of the ranked assignees sitting outside the top 10 and many holding only a few filings, some of that long tail represents undervalued claim positions worth a closer look before a larger filer consolidates the space.
Screen the long tail in EurekaWatch for the 2025–2026 filing catch-up
Because publication lag understates the most recent two years, re-running this trend in six to twelve months will reveal whether the 2021–2024 plateau is holding or whether a new filing wave is already underway.
Set a filing alert in EurekaCommon questions about robot gripper force sensor patents
The leading assignee in this dataset holds 22 of the 285 records in scope, with the top 5 assignees combined holding 67 records — 23.5% of the total. That concentration drops off quickly: the tenth-ranked filer holds only 6 records, and the majority of the 100 ranked assignees hold just a handful each. This is a field with one clear leader rather than several evenly matched incumbents.
Filing activity peaked at 35 records in 2019 and has since plateaued, with 2021 and 2024 both recording 20 filings — 0% growth over that three-year span. Because publication lags actual filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any trend chart will understate true activity and should not be read as a decline. The honest read is a maturing filing wave that has settled rather than one that is shrinking.
B25J (manipulators and robots) is the dominant class, appearing in 94.4% of the 285 records in this dataset, because most filings claim the gripper mechanism alongside or instead of the sensor. G01L (force and pressure measurement) appears in only 15.8% of records, and is the class to prioritise if the goal is specifically the sensing element rather than the gripper hardware. Smaller but relevant overlaps include B21D for sheet-metal working applications and A61B for surgical uses of force-sensing grippers.
US11345043B2, filed by Flexiv Ltd. and granted 2022-05-31, claims an axial force sensor built around a sensing diaphragm with an inner ring, outer ring, and a connecting element more compliant in the axial direction than in other loading directions, paired with at least two signal-pair emitter-receiver couplings across the rings. The claim is specific to this diaphragm geometry and signal-pair arrangement, not to axial force sensing in gripper applications generally. Anyone designing a similar sensor should compare their diaphragm compliance and signal-pair coupling design against this claim rather than assume all axial gripper force sensors are blocked.
The composition data shows most records concentrate on gripper mechanics (B25J) rather than force-sensing specifics (G01L), which appears in only 15.8% of the 285 records. Overlaps into control systems (G05B) and connectors (H01R) each sit at just 2.8%, suggesting the integration layer between the force sensor and the robot's control loop is comparatively under-claimed. A first filing focused narrowly on sensor-to-controller signal processing or calibration, rather than the mechanical gripper itself, is likely to face less prior art density.
Research Robot Gripper Force Sensor Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole robot gripper force sensor 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.