Rotary Percussive Drilling Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- 47.0% concentration. The top five assignees alone account for 1,302 of the 2,771 records in scope — nearly half the field sits with a small group of long-standing drilling equipment makers.
- Filings down 38% since 2021. Complete-year filings fell from 81 in 2021 to 50 in 2024, after peaking at 116 in 2020 — the field has cooled from its high but has not gone quiet.
- E21B dominates at 87.7%. Earth and rock drilling classifications cover the overwhelming majority of records, while adjacent classes like powder metallurgy and geophysics sit in the low single digits.
Filing growth compares 2021 (81 records) with 2024 (50) — 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 2,771 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the rotary percussive drilling patent record shows
Rotary percussive drilling combines rotation with hammer impact to break rock, and the patent record reflects a mature, equipment-heavy field: 2,771 published records span bit metallurgy, hammer energy control, flushing systems and downhole monitoring. The classification spread is narrow — E21B (earth and rock drilling for wells) touches 87.7% of records, meaning most inventive activity is filed under a single umbrella class even when the underlying mechanism differs sharply, from percussive bit design to rod handling automation.
Filing activity peaked in 2020 and has since declined through the last complete year on record, a pattern consistent with a field where core mechanical approaches are well established and incremental refinement — rather than new architectures — dominates recent applications.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 2,771-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how records distribute across IPC subclasses when a single record can carry more than one classification.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings rose from 76 in 2017 to a peak of 116 in 2020, then declined to 50 by 2024 — a 38% drop over the 2021–2024 span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent years understate true activity.
IPC subclass distribution
E21B (earth and rock drilling) covers 87.7% of records, far ahead of B25D percussive tools (5.2%), C22C alloys (4.9%) and B22F powder metallurgy (3.6%). Because records can carry multiple classes, these shares sum to more than 100% and should be read against the 2,771-record total, not against each other.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,771 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Rotary Percussive Drilling with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about rotary percussive drilling and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this dataset
Method and system for controlling a power source at a rock drilling apparatus
The filing describes controlling a power source driving multiple loads at a rock drilling apparatus, determining power demand of a consumer and setting rotation speed accordingly so the available power is allocated across drilling functions in real time.Filed by Epiroc Rock Drills, dated 2013-06-27 (US20130161095A1).
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5154245A | Diamond rock tools for percussive and rotary crushing rock drilling | 513 |
| 2 | US4707384A | Method for making a composite body coated with one or more layers of inorganic materials including CVD diamond | 379 |
| 3 | US6063333A | Method and apparatus for fabrication of cobalt alloy composite inserts | 294 |
| 4 | US5000273A | Low melting point copper-manganese-zinc alloy for infiltration binder in matrix body rock drill bits | 243 |
| 5 | US20110186353A1 | System and Method for Monitoring and Controlling Underground Drilling | 235 |
| 6 | US5415030A | Method for evaluating formations and bit conditions | 234 |
| 7 | US5718948A | Cemented carbide body for rock drilling mineral cutting and highway engineering | 192 |
| 8 | US5730234A | Method for determining drilling conditions comprising a drilling model | 190 |
| 9 | US5771984A | Continuous drilling of vertical boreholes by thermal processes: including rock spallation and fusion | 181 |
| 10 | US4106577A | Hydromechanical drilling device | 175 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — read them as a signal of influence on the field, not of current filing activity.
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 patterns stand out once volume, concentration and classification are read together.
The field concentrates hard at the top
Top 5 assignees combined account for 1,302 of 2,771 records, and the top 10 extend that to 59.2%. New entrants are filing into claim space already dense with prior art from a handful of established drilling equipment makers.
Volume has cooled from its 2020 peak
Filings peaked at 116 in 2020 and fell to 50 by 2024, a 38% decline over that three-year window. This reads as consolidation around established mechanical approaches rather than an exit from the field.
Almost everything files under one umbrella class
E21B covers the overwhelming majority of records, with percussive tools (B25D), alloys (C22C) and powder metallurgy (B22F) trailing well behind in the single digits. Differentiation happens inside E21B claim language, not across classes.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to rotary percussive drilling, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space
A small set of drilling equipment and oilfield services companies account for most of the filing volume, but recent-year momentum has slowed even among the leaders.
One assignee holds the largest single share
The leading assignee's 470 records sit well ahead of fifth place at 114, underlining how uneven the distribution is even within the ranked group.
The drop-off from top 5 to top 10 is steep
Tenth place holds 43 records versus 114 at fifth — the field thins quickly outside the leading cluster, leaving a long tail of smaller filers.
Even active filers are pulling back
Recent-year momentum shows declines across tracked assignees, with several leaders recording zero filings in the latest year — consistent with the broader 2021-2024 decline rather than isolated retreat.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Epiroc Rock Drills AB | 3 | -40% |
| Sandvik Mining and Construction Oy | 1 | -86% |
| Sandvik Intellectual Property AB | 0 | — |
| Sandvik Tamrock | 0 | — |
| Atlas Copco Rock Drills AB | 0 | — |
| Smith International Inc | 0 | — |
| Baker Hughes Holdings LLC | 0 | — |
| Halliburton Energy Services Inc | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with dense core claims and thinner adjacent branches — the next step is deciding where a new filing would actually clear prior art.
Map claim overlap against the leading assignees
With 47.0% of records held by five companies, a freedom-to-operate check against their specific claim language is a faster filter than a general prior-art search.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaTest white-space branches before drafting
Sub-areas like flushing air optimisation and hole deviation correction carry far fewer records than core E21B bit and hammer claims, worth validating before committing drafting resources.
Run a white-space search in EurekaCommon questions about rotary percussive drilling patents
Filing activity concentrates heavily among a small group of drilling equipment and oilfield services companies, with the top five assignees combined holding 1,302 of the 2,771 records in scope — 47.0% of the field. The leader alone holds 470 records, well ahead of fifth place at 114. This means new filers are working around claim territory that a handful of firms have occupied for years, so a freedom-to-operate review against those specific assignees is more useful than a broad prior-art scan.
Filings peaked at 116 in 2020 and declined to 50 by 2024, a 38% drop over that three-year span. This is the most reliable trend read available because 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete — publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so recent years always look lower than they eventually will. The honest read is a field that has cooled from a strong 2020 peak, not one that has stopped filing.
E21B, the earth and rock drilling classification, covers 87.7% of the 2,771 records in scope, making it by far the dominant category. Percussive tools (B25D, 5.2%), alloys (C22C, 4.9%) and powder metallurgy (B22F, 3.6%) trail well behind. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these percentages don't sum to 100% — they each measure share against the full record total independently.
Relative to the dense core claims around bit design and hammer mechanics, branches like real-time bit wear sensing, autonomous rod handling sequencing, hole deviation correction algorithms and flushing air optimisation control carry comparatively few dedicated filings. These are adjacent to the core E21B claim space but haven't been claimed as densely, making them worth a validating search before drafting. High density in the core doesn't mean these adjacent branches are unclaimed entirely, only that they are thinner.
Concentration is high at the top and thins quickly after that: the top 10 assignees combined hold 1,641 of 2,771 records, 59.2% of the field, but the gap between fifth place (114 records) and tenth place (43 records) shows a steep drop-off. Beyond the ranked leaders, the remainder of the 100-company ranking represents a long tail of smaller filers. This pattern is typical of an established mechanical field where a few companies built deep patent estates early and everyone else files around the edges.
Research Rotary Percussive Drilling in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole rotary percussive drilling 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.