Rubber Compounding Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees hold 46.4% of all 112 records in scope, and the top ten hold 65.2% — filing here sits with a small, established group.
- Filing has cooled since 2017. The trend peaked at 4 filings in 2017 and had fallen to a flat midpoint by 2022, with the most recent year understated by publication lag.
- Claim activity clusters in two IPC classes. C08K (additives) and C08L (polymer compositions) between them touch the large majority of records, while C07F organo-metallic chemistry appears in only 8.0%.
What this patent set covers
This landscape tracks patents at the intersection of rubber compounding and vulcanization chemistry — accelerator systems, filler dispersion, reversion resistance, cure kinetics and aging performance — filtered to IPC classes covering polymer compositions, polymer additives and rubber-curing apparatus. The scope runs from 2015 to a 2026 data cut-off across 112 published records held by 44 ranked assignees.
Filing offices skew toward the United States and China, with a meaningful share also filed at the EPO, suggesting the technology is prosecuted for both North American tire manufacturing and Chinese rubber-goods production rather than any single regional market.
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 112 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim weight.
A peak in 2017, then a flat-to-declining run
Filings peaked at 4 in 2017 and the midpoint year of 2022 recorded 0, indicating the field is not in a growth phase. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the final year or two of any such trend will always look thinner than the underlying filing activity actually was — treat the most recent year as incomplete rather than as a real drop-off.
Additives and polymer compositions dominate the claim space
C08K (additives in polymers) appears in 96.4% of the 112 records and C08L (polymer compositions) in 81.3%, confirming this is fundamentally a compounding-chemistry field rather than a tire-design one — B60C (pneumatic tyres) appears in only 25.9% of records. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to well over 100% and should be read against the 112-record total, not against each other.
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 Rubber Compounding and Vulcanization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about rubber compounding and vulcanization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in this set
US3852250A — Vulcanization system containing a three-component accelerator system
A three-component accelerator system for the vulcanization of rubber: one accelerator is 2-(morpholinodithio)-benzothiazole, a second is a compound such as 2-(morpholinothio)-benzothiazole, and a third is morpholine disulfide.Filed by The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, 1974-12-03 — a foundational multi-component accelerator claim that predates the current filing window but anchors the citation graph for accelerator-system chemistry.
View full filing| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6053226A | Rubber composition reinforced with silica and tire with tread thereof | 54 |
| 2 | US20130079445A1 | Treated fillers, compositions containing same, and articles prepared therefrom | 44 |
| 3 | US6512035B1 | Processability of silica-reinforced rubber containing a monofunctional alkyl tin compound | 36 |
| 4 | US5328636A | Rubber vulcanization system containing bis-(2,5-polythio-1,3,4-thiadiazole), bismaleimide and sulfenamide | 34 |
| 5 | EP0941872A2 | Rubber composition reinforced with silica and tire with tread thereof | 31 |
| 6 | US4496683A | Rubber compositions containing a vulcanization system alterative | 29 |
| 7 | US20090306267A1 | Rubber mixture with improved abrasion | 23 |
| 8 | WO2020202125A1 | Rubber compound for an innerliner | 22 |
| 9 | US7442733B2 | Rubber composition comprising a citraconimidomaleimide | 21 |
| 10 | CN105400085A | 一种耐热橡胶及其制备方法 | 20 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to be cited within the searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a ranking of current commercial importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 findings that shape where a new filing would sit relative to existing claim coverage.
A small group holds nearly half the field
The five leading assignees account for 46.4% of all 112 records, and the top ten extend that to 65.2%. A new entrant is not filing into open ground at the compounding-chemistry core; it is filing against established accelerator and filler-treatment portfolios held by a handful of incumbents.
Activity has not grown since its 2017 peak
The filing trend peaked at 4 records in 2017 and the 2022 midpoint sits at 0, pointing to a field that is not expanding. That does not mean the chemistry is settled — dense filing density in earlier years means claim space around core accelerator and filler-dispersion formulations is occupied, which raises freedom-to-operate risk for anyone entering now.
Organo-metallic cure chemistry is the thinnest class
Against C08K's 96.4% and C08L's 81.3%, C07F (organo-metallic and non-carbon compounds) appears in just 8.0% of records. That gap sits alongside C04B (ceramics, cement and refractories) at 12.5% and C08J (polymer processing) at 14.3%, both comparatively lightly claimed relative to the additive and composition core.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to rubber compounding and vulcanization, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the momentum has gone quiet
The ranked assignee list spans 44 companies, from a leader with 17 records down to single-filing entrants — a shape typical of a mature specialty-chemistry niche rather than an emerging one.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 17 records against a fifth-place count of 6 and a tenth-place count of 3 — a steep drop-off that marks this as a leader-plus-long-tail structure rather than a evenly split field.
A long tail beneath the top ten
Below the top ten combined 65.2% share, the remaining 34 ranked assignees split the balance of filings, many holding only one or two records — typical of specialty formulators and regional rubber-goods makers filing narrowly around a single formulation.
Even leading assignees show no recent-year filings
Recent-year momentum tracking across the leading assignees shows 0 filings in the latest year for each of the names checked, consistent with the flat-to-declining trend overall — though the most recent year is always the most understated by publication lag.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. | 0 | — |
| The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company | 0 | — |
| American Cyanamid Company | 0 | — |
| Robinson Brothers Limited | 0 | — |
| Bayer AG | 0 | — |
| Hefei Shichuan Engineering Machinery Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| BAYER CA | 0 | — |
| Monsanto Company (USA) | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next questions depending on whether you are scoping a filing or assessing freedom to operate.
Map claim boundaries around the top assignees
With 65.2% of records held by the top ten, a freedom-to-operate check should start with those portfolios' independent claims on accelerator composition and filler treatment before scoping any new formulation work.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches
C07F organo-metallic chemistry and C04B ceramic-filler hybrids carry comparatively light coverage relative to the C08K/C08L core, which is worth validating against full-text claims before assuming open space.
Run a white-space search in EurekaWatch for reversion-resistance filings post-2022
The flat 2022 midpoint means any renewed filing activity in reversion-resistant crosslink chemistry would be a meaningful early signal — worth a standing watch given the publication lag on recent filings.
Set up a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions about rubber compounding and vulcanization patents
In this dataset of 112 records, the leading assignee holds 17 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder's 6 and the tenth-place holder's 3. The top five assignees combined account for 46.4% of all 112 records, and the top ten reach 65.2%. That leaves 34 further assignees in the ranked list splitting the remainder, many with only one or two filings, which is the typical shape of a mature specialty-chemistry field rather than an emerging one.
Based on the filing trend in this dataset, activity peaked at 4 filings in 2017 and had fallen to 0 at the 2022 midpoint, indicating a flat-to-declining pattern rather than growth. Keep in mind that publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent one or two years in any patent trend will look thinner than actual filing activity — that understatement applies here too, but it does not change the overall flat trajectory visible since the 2017 peak.
Claims concentrate heavily in additive chemistry and polymer composition: C08K (use of additives in polymers) appears in 96.4% of the 112 records and C08L (polymer compositions) in 81.3%. Tire-specific claims under B60C (pneumatic tyres) appear in only 25.9% of records, and narrower classes like C07F (organo-metallic compounds) appear in just 8.0%. This tells you the field's claim density sits in the compounding chemistry itself, not in tire construction or design.
The comparatively thin IPC classes in this dataset — C07F organo-metallic and non-carbon compounds at 8.0% of records, C04B ceramics and refractories at 12.5%, and C08J polymer processing at 14.3% — sit well below the C08K and C08L core. These lighter-claimed branches, particularly organo-metallic cure activators and ceramic-filler hybrid systems, are worth a full-text claims check before assuming they are genuinely open, since IPC-class thinness is a starting signal rather than a final answer.
US3852250A, filed by The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company and dated 1974-12-03, claims a three-component vulcanization accelerator system combining 2-(morpholinodithio)-benzothiazole, a related morpholinothio-benzothiazole compound, and morpholine disulfide. As an older filing it anchors part of the citation graph for accelerator-system chemistry in this space, but its practical blocking effect today depends on its term status and the specific claim scope, which should be checked directly rather than assumed from the abstract alone.
Research Rubber Compounding and Vulcanization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole rubber compounding and vulcanization 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.